Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on July 06, 2009, 02:34:32 PM
-
Pretty funny tactic there. using the DirectV commercial to plug Fox business during hardball. Looks like they want to steal those lib voters & viewers.
-
Pretty funny tactic there. using the DirectV commercial to plug Fox business during hardball. Looks like they want to steal those lib voters & viewers.
Actually it's pretty dumb of MSNBC to let it happen. You don't see that type of thing often, because most networks are smart enough to catch it.
FOX is jizzing their pants right now. MSNBC is costing themselves market share after every commercial, idiots. Some traffic director or PD has their head up their ass over there.
-
Either that, ...or they're taking the money and laughing all the way to the bank. :-\
-
Either that, ...or they're taking the money and laughing all the way to the bank. :-\
No, it's defiantly not that. Why would you let your biggest competitor (who has better numbers than you) advertise on YOUR network and take market share from you? Why would you let them speak directly to your audience? Especially during a new ratings period! Someone at MSNBC has their head up their ass. If they have to take money from their biggest competitor and risk losing market share they are pretty desperate. No one is "laughing all the way to the bank", because is a no-no to allow direct competitors to speak to your audience on your network. MSNBC should be trying to keep what they have, not give them the chance to go to Fox on their watch!
Some dumbass didn't realize the Direct TV spot had a fox news piece in it when they took the order.
-
CNN used to slip them in on MSNBC all the time in the past. haven't seen it in quite a while.
-
FAUX trying to attract smarter viewers? Ironic considering they wouldn't watch FAUX anyway.
-
FAUX trying to attract smarter viewers? Ironic considering they wouldn't watch FAUX anyway.
What proof do you have that Fox has dumb viewers? I'd bet you Fox's audience is just as educated as MSNBC's. Infact, according to the data, Fox's audience is older and makes more money.
Fox is not trying to attract smarter viewers, they are trying to increase their market share, so they can charge more for their advertising timeslots.
MSNBC must be run by dumb Fox viewers, because if I was the boss over there, the fool responsible for letting Fox spots run on my network would be in deep shit. How dumb can you be?
-
What proof do you have that Fox has dumb viewers?
The stats of the target market they cater to (red states) says it all.
-
The stats of the target market they cater to (red states) says it all.
No they don't. I have access to Neilson ratings and I think your bullshitting right now. Are you saying that Fox only has an audience in red states? The fact that MSNBC has a younger audience with a lower median income says it all to me. Btw, true ratings show the real story.
-
Pretty funny tactic there. using the DirectV commercial to plug Fox business during hardball. Looks like they want to steal those lib voters & viewers.
I've seen that before and wondered wtf...
-
No they don't. I have access to Neilson ratings and I think your bullshitting right now. Are you saying that Fox only has an audience in red states? The fact that MSNBC has a younger audience with a lower median income says it all to me. Btw, true ratings show the real story.
Nope. What I said is my previous statement about Fox viewers being dumber has nothing to do with ratings. But with the geographical population of the type of people that it caters to which is reflected in the red states demographic stats.
-
No they don't. I have access to Neilson ratings and I think your bullshitting right now. Are you saying that Fox only has an audience in red states? The fact that MSNBC has a younger audience with a lower median income says it all to me. Btw, true ratings show the real story.
Its amazing how these people argue inane points with a guy who does media and marketing for a living.
-
The stats of the target market they cater to (red states) says it all.
I live in a blue state that has been destroyed by "smart" liberals. Millions of californians are in the same mess.
Blue states by and large are financial basket cases.
-
Blue states by and large are financial basket cases.
And red states lead the polls in what areas exactly?
-
And red states lead the polls in what areas exactly?
lower taxes, lower UE, etc.
Look at Texas. That place still has something like 6% UE compared to the rest of the nation.
-
Hows Michigan working for everybody...Dems everywhere and not a drop of prosperity to drink.
-
lower taxes, lower UE, etc.
Look at Texas. That place still has something like 6% UE compared to the rest of the nation.
higher poverty, higher incest, higher drop outs, higher convicts, etc..
-
higher poverty, higher incest, higher drop outs, higher convicts, etc..
Detroit is the murder capital of the nation.
-
Unreal.....dems have fucked up everywhere, yet they sell minorities the bullshit that "they here for em", and they get reelected. Dems have done nothing for anybody.
-
Nope. What I said is my previous statement about Fox viewers being dumber has nothing to do with ratings. But with the geographical population of the type of people that it caters to which is reflected in the red states demographic stats.
Which shows your lack of understanding of how Nielson ratings work. Ratings have everything to do with this. You can pull qualitative data from Nielsons' research (Which is tv's rating system) that tells you education level and median income. You're comments are based on perception and ignorance. Unless of course your a media buyer, you own an advertising agency or you specialize in TV data, rankings and research.
-
I would answer that NO. Body..its funny, we have a similar job.
-
I would answer that NO. Body..its funny, we have a similar job.
I'm a marketing consultant and I also buy media from time to time for my clients. I have dealt with TV through my reps and have a basic understanding of how it works. That said, to think a TV station's demo's and qualitative are based solely on state driven demographics is ignorant. A shitload of educated dem's tune in to FOX to see what the other side is thinking and the same can be said for MSNBC and CNN.
Look at Massachusetts. It's a state with a median age in the 50's, thats slightly more male, highly educated and there is a very small minority population. it's a state with a high median income and a lot of colleges! However, there is a hip hop radio station here that is one of the biggest and most successful in the country. An ignorant person might think that the top Hip Hop stations would only be in young markets with a lot of minorities, but the truth is that hip hop is ingested most by suburban white kids and college aged listeners....aka all the kids of the main demo in MA.
-
Which shows your lack of understanding of how Nielson ratings work. Ratings have everything to do with this. You can pull qualitative data from Nielsons' research (Which is tv's rating system) that tells you education level and median income. You're comments are based on perception and ignorance. Unless of course your a media buyer, you own an advertising agency or you specialize in TV data, rankings and research.
Shows your lack of basic reading skills.
As I stated - quite plain as day - I was in no way refering to Nielson ratings. You just misinterpreted that by your own mistake.
-
Shows your lack of basic reading skills.
As I stated - quite plain as day - I was in no way refering to Nielson ratings. You just misinterpreted that by your own mistake.
Quit while you are ahead. you have been owned again and need to go away to avoid further humiliation.
-
Shows your lack of basic reading skills.
As I stated - quite plain as day - I was in no way refering to Nielson ratings. You just misinterpreted that by your own mistake.
Not really, because Nielson is the rating system that the TV industry uses to base the stats and characteristics of their audience. It's what the whole industry subscribes to. Your reference of state based demographics and political allegiance to describe a TV audience is off base and ignorant. Again, Nielson is everything when talking about a TV stations audience, because that research is the currency that is used to define who is watching their programs. Ex: According to the latest Nielson research, MSNBC has 150,000 Avg viewers M-F 7p-8p who have a median income of 100,000+ and have 4 year college degree. That piece of information is accepted because it's Nielson data. If you said that same sentence but said according to the latest Democratic statistics based in Democratic states....t would be useless and false in the TV world.
-
higher poverty, higher incest, higher drop outs, higher convicts, etc..
This is the same stuff you posted about Alaska.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0297.pdf
Here are the crime rates by state.
Its independent of voting history.
By the way whats with you and incest.
Its a state thats not even tracked yet you claim some superior knowledge about it.
But then again its like most of your smear comments.
Post crap you know can't be proven and then call everyone out for not proving you wrong.
oh brother.
-
Quit while you are ahead. you have been owned again and need to go away to avoid further humiliation.
You can only wish.
Apparently someone is trying to use Nielson ratings to compete with hard stats? And you think I am owned? No wonder you believe Zombieland USA is a reality.
Only part you got right there is that I am indeed, ahead.
Poverty level.
How many of the top ten are red states?
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_per_bel_pov_lev-economy-percent-below-poverty-level
Should I continue to compare red states vs blue states after I return home tonight? Or is this enough for you?
-
You can only wish.
Apparently someone is trying to use Nielson ratings to compete with hard stats? And you think I am owned? No wonder you believe Zombieland USA is a reality.
Only part you got right there is that I am indeed, ahead.
Poverty level.
How many of the top ten are red states?
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_per_bel_pov_lev-economy-percent-below-poverty-level
Should I continue to compare red states vs blue states after I return home tonight? Or is this enough for you?
It must be good to work the DMV and being able to leave at 4:30. I just had lunch.
-
You can only wish.
Apparently someone is trying to use Nielson ratings to compete with hard stats? And you think I am owned? No wonder you believe Zombieland USA is a reality.
Only part you got right there is that I am indeed, ahead.
Poverty level.
How many of the top ten are red states?
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_per_bel_pov_lev-economy-percent-below-poverty-level
Should I continue to compare red states vs blue states after I return home tonight? Or is this enough for you?
Moving the yardsticks again.
crime states don't pan out so now its poverty.
How about mean income or something else.
By the way you might want to look at those stats by the county.
Because there are some counties in New York that are the same sizes as whole states.
-
You can only wish.
Apparently someone is trying to use Nielson ratings to compete with hard stats? And you think I am owned? No wonder you believe Zombieland USA is a reality.
Only part you got right there is that I am indeed, ahead.
Poverty level.
How many of the top ten are red states?
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_per_bel_pov_lev-economy-percent-below-poverty-level
Should I continue to compare red states vs blue states after I return home tonight? Or is this enough for you?
You just don't get it. TV audiences and their qualitative information has nothing to do with state based stats. For the third time....Nielson research is the currency that the entire TV industry uses for all it's demographic statistics and for the personal characteristics of their audiences. Income, education - etc.. As I showcased plain as day on the last page, state demographics can have little to do with niche content (like you see on political TV stations). Every stat you posted means nothing to the TV industry since their universal research provider is Nielson.
-
This is the same stuff you posted about Alaska.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0297.pdf
Here are the crime rates by state.
Its independent of voting history.
By the way whats with you and incest.
Its a state thats not even tracked yet you claim some superior knowledge about it.
But then again its like most of your smear comments.
Post crap you know can't be proven and then call everyone out for not proving you wrong.
oh brother.
Did you even read the link you posted? Because you just got assraped by your own link. Might want to try a wee bit harder next time.
Directly from your link, the Top 10 States with Violent Crime
DC 1380
SC 767
TN 757
FL 709
Maryland 704
NM 646
NV 608
Alaska 632
Delaware 633
Louisana 597
Property Crime
Washington 4890
Arizona 4827
Hawaii 4800
DC 4490
SC 4370
TX 4319
TN 4300
NV 4246
etc..
Now exactly HOW many of the Top 10 are red states? Bad enough getting pwned over something so simple, even worse when pwned by material you supplied yourself.
Instead of asking me about incest, you should be asking your Republican friends. After all, your side has the highest rate of rape and incest (Alabama and Alaska) locked down too. So don't bother making excuses you can instead spend better time writing the publishers of the data and letting them know how inaccurate their findings are. I am sure they, just like myself, will get a chuckle out of it.
-
It must be good to work the DMV and being able to leave at 4:30. I just had lunch.
We've already had the little DMV conversation. Didn't turn out great for you last time did it?
-
You just don't get it. TV audiences and their qualitative information has nothing to do with state based stats. For the third time....Nielson research is the currency that the entire TV industry uses for all it's demographic statistics and for the personal characteristics of their audiences. Income, education - etc.. As I showcased plain as day on the last page, state demographics can have little to do with niche content (like you see on political TV stations). Every stat you posted means nothing to the TV industry since their universal research provider is Nielson.
No, you don't get it. Which is beyond me why you can't. There shouldn't be any confusion whatsoever as I have stated twice before I am not refering to Nielson ratings. But yet, that doesn't penetrate your bubble? Ok... carry on.
-
We've already had the little DMV conversation. Didn't turn out great for you last time did it?
Oh thats right, the post office.
-
No, you don't get it. Which is beyond me why you can't. There shouldn't be any confusion whatsoever as I have stated twice before I am not refering to Nielson ratings. But yet, that doesn't penetrate your bubble? Ok... carry on.
You're just making yourself look foolish here. You said:
Quote from: body88 on Today at 10:04:18 AM
What proof do you have that Fox has dumb viewers?
The stats of the target market they cater to (red states) says it all.
Again, the stats of the "target markets" mean nothing. Second, who says Fox is targeting those markets? Thats not how it works. They target all major media markets. Some are in red states, some are in blue states. If your referring to Fox's audience, you must refer to Nielson data when trying to profile them, SINCE THE TV INDUSTRY SUBSCRIBIES TO NIELSON AS CURRENCY AND NOT "STATE DATA". YOUR STATE DATA MEANS NOTHING WHEN REFERING TO A TV AUDIENCE. IT'S NOT THAT HARD.
-
You're just making yourself look foolish here. You said:
Again, the stats of the target market mean nothing. If your referring to Fox's audience, you must refer to Nielson ratings when trying to profile them, SINCE THE TV INDUSTRY SUBSCRIBIES TO NIELSON AS CURRENCY AND THEIR DATA SAYS THAT WHAT YOU SAID IS INCORRECT.
Body - dont bother.
Go look on the thread where we discussed Barney Franks' gay boyfriend running a prostitution ring out of the apartment. Lurker denied my allegation and said I was wrong because the ring was run out of the apartment, and not the basement as I thought. He/She/It could not realize that what he claimed was even worse since if it was run out of the basement maybe Frank could claim ignorance.
Lurker is the king of spin, distraction, changing lines, etc.
-
Did you even read the link you posted? Because you just got assraped by your own link. Might want to try a wee bit harder next time.
Directly from your link, the Top 10 States with Violent Crime
DC 1380
SC 767
TN 757
FL 709
Maryland 704
NM 646
NV 608
Alaska 632
Delaware 633
Louisana 597
Property Crime
Washington 4890
Arizona 4827
Hawaii 4800
DC 4490
SC 4370
TX 4319
TN 4300
NV 4246
etc..
Now exactly HOW many of the Top 10 are red states? Bad enough getting pwned over something so simple, even worse when pwned by material you supplied yourself.
Instead of asking me about incest, you should be asking your Republican friends. After all, your side has the highest rate of rape and incest (Alabama and Alaska) locked down too. So don't bother making excuses you can instead spend better time writing the publishers of the data and letting them know how inaccurate their findings are. I am sure they, just like myself, will get a chuckle out of it.
your an idiot that can't read. I said that that the it wasn't a red or blue state thing.
As you can well see, Washington is a blue state and is leading in property crime. Of the top 5 listed 3 are blue states.
As for violent crime Florida, Nevada, DC, Maryland, Delaware all were blue states 50-50.
That information is directly from the US census not some slanted publisher.
There are no incest stats you moron.
-
I'm sure Fox ignores New York and Boston, they're blue cities. It doesn't matter that they're the some of the top media markets in the country. Fox hate ignores all facts.
-
crime states don't pan out so now its poverty.
How about mean income or something else.
How about :
States with highest rapes
http://www.swivel.com/graphs/show/17602366
How many of the top 10 are red states?
Poverty?
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_per_bel_pov_lev-economy-percent-below-poverty-level
How many of the Top 10 are red states?
Obesity?
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
http://calorielab.com/news/2008/07/02/fattest-states-2008/
Divorce?
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/lif_div_rat-lifestyle-divorce-rate
Teen Pregnancies?
Unwed pregnancies?
Anything else?
-
Oh thats right, the post office.
That was your second fall back. That didn't go so well either.
So let's move onto the third one. Just like you did last time.
-
You're just making yourself look foolish here. You said:
Again, the stats of the "target markets" mean nothing. Second, who says Fox is targeting those markets? Thats not how it works. They target all major media markets. Some are in red states, some are in blue states. If your referring to Fox's audience, you must refer to Nielson data when trying to profile them, SINCE THE TV INDUSTRY SUBSCRIBIES TO NIELSON AS CURRENCY AND NOT "STATE DATA". YOUR STATE DATA MEANS NOTHING WHEN REFERING TO A TV AUDIENCE. IT'S NOT THAT HARD.
You are the one looking foolish by continuing to insinuate anything I said was related to Nielson ratings.
Since I didn't, you are flailing empty air here.
-
Body - dont bother.
Go look on the thread where we discussed Barney Franks' gay boyfriend running a prostitution ring out of the apartment. Lurker denied my allegation and said I was wrong because the ring was run out of the apartment, and not the basement as I thought. He/She/It could not realize that what he claimed was even worse since if it was run out of the basement maybe Frank could claim ignorance.
Lurker is the king of spin, distraction, changing lines, etc.
Are you still clinging to that false dream? By the end of that thread, I already tossed out all your bullshit allegations.
You were pwned beyond belief until finally admitting what I stated all along. Barney wasn't arrested. He wasn't indicted. He was barred.
You got made into a little bitch on that thread. Should I bump it to refresh your memory of how badly your lies were exposed?
-
your an idiot that can't read. I said that that the it wasn't a red or blue state thing.
I can't read that sentence, but mainly because you're the idiot who wrote it.
Of course you didn't say it was a red or blue thing. *I* did. And I posted links to show stats supporting it.
Your link is from 2006 correct? Was FL red or blue 2006? NV? Hmmm...?
You just got assraped by your own link again and it's really getting to be pathetic.
-
You are the one looking foolish by continuing to insinuate anything I said was related to Nielson ratings.
Since I didn't, you are flailing empty air here.
I hope you've learned a good lesson here. You were exposed.
-
Subject matter experts mean nothing on this board. Cutting and pasting make everybody equal, just ask TA.
-
I hope you've learned a good lesson here. You were exposed.
The only thing exposed was your lack of reading comprehension.
But hey... you can try again later. Perhaps with an arguement that actually pertains to something I really posted.
-
The only thing exposed was your lack of reading comprehension.
But hey... you can try again later. Perhaps with an arguement that actually pertains to something I really posted.
You've been exposed :(
-
You've been exposed :(
Only as someone that "Republican Logic" (misdirecting, deflection, irrelevant replies, delusional reality) is ineffective against.
-
Only as someone that "Republican Logic" (misdirecting, deflection, irrelevant replies, delusional reality) is ineffective against.
Do I need to remind you of who you shill for???
-
Only as someone that "Republican Logic" (misdirecting, deflection, irrelevant replies, delusional reality) is ineffective against.
No. You've been exposed.
-
Lack of reading comprehension on your part doesn't constitute exposure on my part.
But nice try. Next time maybe read the thread you are attempting to reply to.
-
Do I need to remind you of who you shill for???
Since I live in FL, I neither shill nor vote for Franks. So add one more mark to your irrelevant post count.
Hope this helps.
-
Since I live in FL, I neither shill nor vote for Franks. So add one more mark to your irrelevant post count.
Hope this helps.
Ha ha. How is working at Taco Bell been for you. ;D
-
Ha ha. How is working at Taco Bell been for you. ;D
Beats being a teleterror I would say.
-
Beats being a teleterror I would say.
Ok. I'm already up 4k for the day on a deal I closed this morning that took me less than an hours' work, before 9:30 a.m.
Taco Bell does not pay that well.
-
Good for you. Maybe you will get something out of that 4K as a commission too.
I can only imagine the prestige you deliver and awe and respect when you introduce yourself to people and inform them that you are a bill collector. Impressive!
-
Good for you. Maybe you will get something out of that 4K as a commission too.
I can only imagine the prestige you deliver and awe and respect when you introduce yourself to people and inform them that you are a bill collector. Impressive!
You know what idiot, my business is doing ok because i am good at what I do and get results.
I collected 1.2 million for a concrete contractor last week from a Chinese Bank based in Hong Kong. Do you think that some idiot could pull that off who was simply a "bill collector"?
-
Goody for you.
Since you are such an esteemed and accomplished debt chaser, if the check I got for shooting the bachelorette party in Vegas last week bounces, I will turn it over to you. Then you sic 'em over the phone for me.
-
Goody for you.
Since you are such an esteemed and accomplished debt chaser, if the check I got for shooting the bachelorette party in Vegas last week bounces, I will turn it over to you. Then you sic 'em over the phone for me.
I go in person as well to collect debt as well.
-
I go in person as well to collect debt as well.
That's even better (as well). Because if they don't pay up, I have some pretty good photos (as well) of two of the bridesmaids (as well) in Tao that wouldn't go over well with their fiancees (as well). So you could certainly recruit them to help put on the pressure (as well).
-
That's even better (as well). Because if they don't pay up, I have some pretty good photos (as well) of two of the bridesmaids (as well) in Tao that wouldn't go over well with their fiancees (as well). So you could certainly recruit them to help put on the pressure (as well).
Ha ha nice! Facebook should be a good first start.
-
I can't read that sentence, but mainly because you're the idiot who wrote it.
Of course you didn't say it was a red or blue thing. *I* did. And I posted links to show stats supporting it.
Your link is from 2006 correct? Was FL red or blue 2006? NV? Hmmm...?
You just got assraped by your own link again and it's really getting to be pathetic.
You are a complete idiot.
I posted data from the US census. You moron.
Crime stats aren't related to state and I proved it.
Now you ignore it and make up stuff like related census data to state politics that's fine wasn't there a gubernatorial election in 2006.
I could go by the list of democratic governors or by Senators or Congressional districts.
It all proves the same thing Red and Blue states are about even on crime.
If you want to look into it farther you need to look at county demographics.
But this beyond your small mind to comprehend.
-
Are you disputing the data contained in your own link?
If you are saying the data you referenced isn't related to states themselves then that would throw your entire argument itself out the window. You can't debate me when you are clueless about the data you are attempting to use in the first place. Nice way to pwn yourself once again. You must have a tough time sorting the voices in your head out when arguing with yourself.
-
Are you disputing the data contained in your own link?
If you are saying the data you referenced isn't related to states themselves then that would throw your entire argument itself out the window. You can't debate me when you are clueless about the data you are attempting to use in the first place. Nice way to pwn yourself once again. You must have a tough time sorting the voices in your head out when arguing with yourself.
I am not disputing anything. The data I posted was by state.
You are trying to relate an issue to by state voting pattern. When its not.
Which I proved by counting your state totals.
Crime is regional and is based on social and economic factors.
This is exactly the same thing Body was saying about marketing. Its regional and not based by state.
You don't understand this because your an idiot.
Hope this Helps.
-
If you put as much effort into reading and keeping up with the thread as you do backpedaling after your own post has been used against you, you wouldn't be pwned so much.
Perhaps start back over on page 1 and try again.
-
If you put as much effort into reading and keeping up with the thread as you do backpedaling after your own post has been used against you, you wouldn't be pwned so much.
Perhaps start back over on page 1 and try again.
Back pedaling, What.
I have said since the stat that crime is not red or blue state.
You ignore that fact and instead try to prove your own crazy theory that isn't true.
Oh well.
-
FAUX trying to attract smarter viewers? Ironic considering they wouldn't watch FAUX anyway.
::) ::) ::)
-
My "theory" of red states in relation to blue states for those stats had data linked to them. They were supported. Even by your own link. :D
Instead, you try to backpedal and split hairs as if that changes anything remotely what I have posted about since Page 1.
Again, a little bit of effort in comprehending at the start will save you a lot more effort of nonsense at the end.
-
::) ::) ::)
After reading that well thought post and dazzling display of in depth debate skills, I can conclude you are a FAUX viewer yourself.
People who (ab)use the little emoticons are generally those with nothing to say worthwhile in the first place.
-
After reading that well thought post and dazzling display of in depth debate skills, I can conclude you are a FAUX viewer yourself.
People who (ab)use the little emoticons are generally those with nothing to say worthwhile in the first place.
INCLUDE ME IN THAT GROUP.
:o :o :o :o :o :o ::) ::) ::) :P :P :P :P :-* :-* :-* :-\ :-\ :-\
-
INCLUDE ME IN THAT GROUP.
:o :o :o :o :o :o ::) ::) ::) :P :P :P :P :-* :-* :-* :-\ :-\ :-\
I already did.
You Repubs seem to have a common trait amongst yourself with constantly rehashing redundant material and posting methods.
-
I already did.
You Repubs seem to have a common trait amongst yourself with constantly rehashing redundant material and posting methods.
What, like not wanting to become a communist dictatorship under ZERO????
-
After reading that well thought post and dazzling display of in depth debate skills, I can conclude you are a FAUX viewer yourself.
People who (ab)use the little emoticons are generally those with nothing to say worthwhile in the first place.
You where exposed to know little to nothing about Fox's core audience. You even thought, state derived "data" had something to do with it. Ha-ha!
-
My "theory" of red states in relation to blue states for those stats had data linked to them. They were supported. Even by your own link. :D
Instead, you try to backpedal and split hairs as if that changes anything remotely what I have posted about since Page 1.
Again, a little bit of effort in comprehending at the start will save you a lot more effort of nonsense at the end.
your an idiot that can't read. I said that that the it wasn't a red or blue state thing.
As you can well see, Washington is a blue state and is leading in property crime. Of the top 5 listed 3 are blue states.
As for violent crime Florida, Nevada, DC, Maryland, Delaware all were blue states 50-50.
That information is directly from the US census not some slanted publisher.
There are no incest stats you moron.
You moved the yardsticks by not including Florida or Nevada, yet they are blue states in 2008.
How about governors
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/List:of:United:States:Governors.htm
All democrats in 2006 TN, Louisiana, Delaware, New Mexico, DC (Virginia)
Looks like 50-50 to me.
You came up with a theory that has been disproved many times. Its alright to be wrong.
so
STFU
-
You moved the yardsticks by not including Florida or Nevada, yet they are blue states in 2008.
How about governors
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/List:of:United:States:Governors.htm
All democrats in 2006 TN, Louisiana, Delaware, New Mexico, DC (Virginia)
Looks like 50-50 to me.
You came up with a theory that has been disproved many times. Its alright to be wrong.
so
STFU
I really dont think looking at states is the issue. Instead, we should be looking at counties since there are red states where the crime is highly solely because of massive crime in "blue" areas.
For example, in my state of NY, most of the crime is committed in areas dominated by liberals. Yet, there are tons of areas that are run by GOP leaders.
-
I really dont think looking at states is the issue. Instead, we should be looking at counties since there are red states where the crime is highly solely because of massive crime in "blue" areas.
For example, in my state of NY, most of the crime is committed in areas dominated by liberals. Yet, there are tons of areas that are run by GOP leaders.
I agree. That's what I have been saying.
Lurker doesn't care because he can't comprehend that there are other issues that cause crime and that there are areas in every state where the crime rates are extraordinarily high.
For Example Native crime in Alaska is very high and urban youth crime is high in Chicago.
He doesn't even think that my ideas for fighting crime would probably be close to the same as his.
(IE reduction of poverty, more street programs, more after school programs, home ownership)
I am liberal, he is delusional.
-
I agree. That's what I have been saying.
Lurker doesn't care because he can't comprehend that there are other issues that cause crime and that there are areas in every state where the crime rates are extraordinarily high.
For Example Native crime in Alaska is very high and urban youth crime is high in Chicago.
He doesn't even think that my ideas for fighting crime would probably be close to the same as his.
(IE reduction of poverty, more street programs, more after school programs, home ownership)
I am liberal, he is delusional.
to me, if you want to end a lot of crime, its called work.
Is these fools put in a hard day of 8 hours work being productive, the last thing on their mind would be committing stupid crimes since they would be too tired.
-
to me, if you want to end a lot of crime, its called work.
Is these fools put in a hard day of 8 hours work being productive, the last thing on their mind would be committing stupid crimes since they would be too tired.
True, but you need to get them to that place.
You know, where hard work becomes a better choice then stealing.
Jail isn't a deterrent.
But that's why I am liberal.
-
True, but you need to get them to that place.
You know, where hard work becomes a better choice then stealing.
Jail isn't a deterrent.
But that's why I am liberal.
That's why I favor boot camps. ;D ;D
-
That's why I favor boot camps. ;D ;D
like this
HA
-
You where exposed to know little to nothing about Fox's core audience. You even thought, state derived "data" had something to do with it. Ha-ha!
*YAWN*
Majority of FAUX News target group = Republicans
Majority of red state population group = Republicans
Come back. Try again when you can grasp a simple concept. Instead of trying to twist it into what you "thought" I was refering too.
-
You moved the yardsticks by not including Florida or Nevada, yet they are blue states in 2008.
How about governors
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/List:of:United:States:Governors.htm
All democrats in 2006 TN, Louisiana, Delaware, New Mexico, DC (Virginia)
Looks like 50-50 to me.
You came up with a theory that has been disproved many times. Its alright to be wrong.
so
STFU
Pssstt.... your little link was from WHAT year? Yeah, that's right.
Psssstttt... one governor is still a single individual person and it takes more than that to make up a state's population. You must be choking on that "yardstick" you keep harping about by now.
Class dismissed. Maybe tomorrow you come back and try once more?
-
Instead of whining about my proof I posted to support my claims, why not post your own proof to support yours. Divide up the counties and let's see.
Of course, unless your "proof" actually comes back to bite you in the ass and you get pwned by it.
-
*YAWN*
Majority of FAUX News target group = Republicans
Majority of red state population group = Republicans
Come back. Try again when you can grasp a simple concept. Instead of trying to twist it into what you "thought" I was refering too.
I've already told you three times why your argument is total shit. You've been exposed :)
-
Pssstt.... your little link was from WHAT year? Yeah, that's right.
Psssstttt... one governor is still a single individual person and it takes more than that to make up a state's population. You must be choking on that "yardstick" you keep harping about by now.
Class dismissed. Maybe tomorrow you come back and try once more?
You are the second biggest tool here.
The list was governors in 2006. The presidential votes were for the last election.
I could go by senators if you want.
As for states, the crime rates don't automatically change depending on voting patterns you moron.
So lets see from what Lurker should have learned today.
Crime rates and tv advertising buy rates are based on regional and not state demographics.
What he actually learned. Nothing because his head is up his ass.
-
You are the second biggest tool here.
The list was governors in 2006. The presidential votes were for the last election.
I could go by senators if you want.
As for states, the crime rates don't automatically change depending on voting patterns you moron.
So lets see from what Lurker should have learned today.
Crime rates and tv advertising buy rates are based on regional and not state demographics.
What he actually learned. Nothing because his head is up his ass.
And SAMSON123's closest competitor gets thrown down a deep dark hole. :-\
-
Sadly, one still seems to be equating governors and senators to determine the make up of a state's population.
Sadly, another one still seems to think the entire thread was about Nielson ratings.
Sadly, for those two - and their dimwit followers - that isn't the case.
Which once again, only further illustrates my claim that red states have a higher percentage of undesireable population characteristics due to the majority of conservative Repubs that live within the borders.
Instead of continuing to look like idiots while chasing your tails on this thread, perhaps you can better spend the effort cleaning up the red states and improve their rankings in the highest crime, rape, uneducated drop outs, poverty, etc....
-
Sadly, one still seems to be equating governors and senators to determine the make up of a state's population.
Sadly, another one still seems to think the entire thread was about Nielson ratings.
Sadly, for those two - and their dimwit followers - that isn't the case.
Which once again, only further illustrates my claim that red states have a higher percentage of undesireable population characteristics due to the majority of conservative Repubs that live within the borders.
Instead of continuing to look like idiots while chasing your tails on this thread, perhaps you can better spend the effort cleaning up the red states and improve their rankings in the highest crime, rape, uneducated drop outs, poverty, etc....
DC, Detroit, St. Louis, Atlanta, Memphis, Camden, Philly, Bridgeport, et al are all wonderfull places
-
DC, Detroit, St. Louis, Atlanta, Memphis, Camden, Philly, Bridgeport, et al are all wonderfull places
Since when did all of those places become STATES?
-
DC, Detroit, St. Louis, Atlanta, Memphis, Camden, Philly, Bridgeport, et al are all wonderfull places
It goes to my point that looking at states is not really that reliable since many Red States have blue areas where all the crime occurs and vice versa.
Many "blue states" have huge GOP populations, but rely on cities, where all the crime occurs for their votes.
-
It goes to my point that looking at states is not really that reliable since many Red States have blue areas where all the crime occurs and vice versa.
Many "blue states" have huge GOP populations, but rely on cities, where all the crime occurs for their votes.
My point is that I am looking at RED states as a whole that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college.
But everyone wants to whine and try to split hairs in order to make excuses about the stats. Oh... let's break it down in cities. Oh... let's break it down into governors. Oh.... let's break it down into counties. What next? Break it down into households? ::)
If I were drawing parallels to cities, governors or counties I would have specifically states so in my original post. But I wasn't which is why I SPECIFICALLY said STATES. But hey... if making excuses helps the little ones cope with that kind of stuff more power to them.
-
My point is that I am looking at RED states as a whole that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college.
But everyone wants to whine and try to split hairs in order to make excuses about the stats. Oh... let's break it down in cities. Oh... let's break it down into governors. Oh.... let's break it down into counties. What next? Break it down into households? ::)
If I were drawing parallels to cities, governors or counties I would have specifically states so in my original post. But I wasn't which is why I SPECIFICALLY said STATES. But hey... if making excuses helps the little ones cope with that kind of stuff more power to them.
Now you moved the yardsticks again.
"Its RED states that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college."
What the hell does that mean. Every election cycle there are few Red and Blue states that continually vote the same way.
Otherwise there is no real conformity.
Florida and New Mexico for example were blue under Clinton, Red under Bush, and Blue under Obama.
That would make them blue states based on past voting history, but you already said they were Red states.
Also the most violent place in the country is DC and that is always a Blue state.
Just admit you have no idea what you are talking about.
-
Now you moved the yardsticks again.
"Its RED states that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college."
What the hell does that mean. Every election cycle there are few Red and Blue states that continually vote the same way.
Otherwise there is no real conformity.
Florida and New Mexico for example were blue under Clinton, Red under Bush, and Blue under Obama.
That would make them blue states based on past voting history, but you already said they were Red states.
Also the most violent place in the country is DC and that is always a Blue state.
Just admit you have no idea what you are talking about.
Agreed, this guy has no clue what he's talking about.
-
Day 3 here and still not a single credible argument to refute any of those claims.
Especially when the "date" that was supplied in your own little link (that blew up in your face) was says it all.
Come back. Try again. But learn to read a bit first.
Here's a hint : "Red States", "Top 10", time line
-
Day 3 here and still not a single credible argument to refute any of those claims.
Especially when the "date" that was supplied in your own little link (that blew up in your face) was says it all.
Come back. Try again. But learn to read a bit first.
Here's a hint : "Red States", "Top 10", time line
"Its RED states that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college."
How far back you wanna go.
Seeing that during Reagan and Bush 1 every state but 3 were red.
Before that the south that you claim as republican was actually democratic.
You moron.
You look like an idiot because you don't even know the history of the electoral college.
It also nice that you can't read statistics you fool. You could go back 30 years and see the same areas are high in crime.
Thats why I posted the information from the US census.
-
What date is on your little link? Why talk about go back as far.... blah blah blah... when there is no need because you supplied a link that had a specific date.
What are the state colors for any dates listed on my links? Again... those links contain dates. (Talk about not reading. Or maybe your problem lies in basic comprehension)
You can find these "color-y thingys" at electoral-vote.com or 270towin.com.
Big Hint : STATES is the key word. Unlike the typical (failing) deflection of governors, senators, countires, ..*yawn* whatever else spin is attempted.
What are the Top 10 STATES with the highest percentage of rape, crime, divorce, drug use, poverty, drop out, retardation, etc..
Out of those 10 STATES, how many are RED?
Post your findings.
-
What date is on your little link? Why talk about go back as far.... blah blah blah... when there is no need because you supplied a link that had a specific date.
What are the state colors for any dates listed on my links? Again... those links contain dates. (Talk about not reading. Or maybe your problem lies in basic comprehension)
You can find these "color-y thingys" at electoral-vote.com or 270towin.com.
Big Hint : STATES is the key word. Unlike the typical (failing) deflection of governors, senators, countires, ..*yawn* whatever else spin is attempted.
What are the Top 10 STATES with the highest percentage of rape, crime, divorce, drug use, poverty, drop out, retardation, etc..
Out of those 10 STATES, how many are RED?
Post your findings.
Your exact quote,
"Its RED states that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college."
Florida and New Mexico for example were blue under Clinton, Red under Bush, and Blue under Obama.
Also the most violent place in the country is DC and that is always a Blue state.
That would mean that there were actually more Blue states then Red.
Your comparison is as ridiculous as your posting.
Hope this helps.
-
NOT AS REFLECTED IN THE DATES CONTAINED IN YOUR LINK OR THE LINKS I POSTED!
-
Your link is for 2006 correct?
Directly from your link, the Top 10 States with Violent Crime
DC 1380
SC 767
TN 757
FL 709
Maryland 704
NM 646
NV 608
Alaska 632
Delaware 633
Louisana 597
Property Crime
Washington 4890
Arizona 4827
Hawaii 4800
DC 4490
SC 4370
TX 4319
TN 4300
NV 4246
etc..
The last POTUS election that occurred before 2006 was for year 2004.
www.270towin.com
What color is the majority of those states there? Hmmmmm?
"Its RED states that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college."
Basic English statement that unlike you, doesn't split hairs, juggle inconsistencies, offer excuses, backpedal, etc..
-
POVERTY
Year of stats = 2004
Last POTUS election = 2004
Results :
# 1 Mississippi: 21.6%
# 2 Louisiana: 19.4%
# 3 New Mexico: 19.3%
# 4 District of Columbia: 18.9%
= 5 Arkansas: 17.9%
= 5 West Virginia: 17.9%
# 7 Kentucky: 17.4%
# 8 Texas: 16.6%
# 9 Alabama: 16.1%
# 10 South Carolina:
How many of those are red states? Hmmm?
SUICIDE
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=667&cat=2
Date of Stat = 2006
Date of last POTUS Election = 2004
1. Wyoming 21.7
2. Alaska 20.0
3. Montana 19.7
4. Nevada 19.5
5. New Mexico 18.0
6. South Dakota 16.0
6. Arizona 16.0
8. Utah 15.8
9. Idaho 15.6
10. Oregon 15.2
How many are red states in that time period?
VIOLENT CRIME
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=117&cat=2
Date of Stat = 2007
Last POTUS election = 2004
1. District of Columbia 1,414.31
2. South Carolina 788.3
3. Tennessee 753.3
4. Nevada 750.6
5. Louisiana 729.5
6. Florida 722.6
7. Delaware 689.2
8. New Mexico 664.2
9. Alaska 661.2
10. Maryland 641.9
How many of those states are red?
TEEN BIRTHS
Date of Stats = 2006
Last POTUS election = 2004
1. Mississippi 68.4
2. New Mexico 64.1
3. Texas 63.1
4. Arkansas 62.3
5. Arizona 62.0
6. Oklahoma 59.6
7. Nevada 55.8
8. Tennessee 54.7
9. Kentucky 54.6
10. Georgia 54.2
RAPE
Want to look at the top 10 states there and tell us how many are red?
Out of wedlock births
Stat date - 2006
Last POTUS election = 2004
http://womensissues.about.com/od/datingandsex/a/TeenPregStates.htm
1. Nevada (113)
2. Arizona (104)
3. Mississippi (103)
4. New Mexico (103)
5. Texas (101)
6. Florida (97)
7. California (96)
8. Georgia (95)
9. North Carolina (95)
10. Arkansas (93)
MENTAL ILLNESS
http://www.mentalhealthamerica.net/go/state-ranking
How many of the Top 10 states rated there are red?
There shouldn't be a point in having to go on and on about this just for the delusions of those people who rode the short bus.
-
"Its RED states that tend to support GOP candidates as reflected in the electoral college."
Explain to me which states these are.
As I showed, you don't have a clue on what you are talking about.
Half of the states you posted go between Red and Blue.
-
Not for the SPECIFIC dates of those stats listed they don't.
Based on your reading level, it's pretty safe to assume you didn't graduate with honors from the Sylvan Academy.