[Kaitlyn S]

Winston, let's say our intelligence told us that North Korea had nuclear weapons that could wipe out a major American city with 90% probability, and that they planned to use them somehow in the next week on New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Phoenix, how would you suggest it be handled?

Plus, do you consider the possibility that the poll stating that 46% of Republicans support a preemptive strike against North Korea might has as much polling bias (or maybe just blatant lying) as the poll that states that 51% of Muslims in America support Sharia law?

https://www.centerfo...-shariah-jihad/

Note: the article implies this but I don't believe it. I would guess it's closer to 1 in 10 and that the owners of the site want you to believe that it's much higher than it really is. I only posted this to show you that your poll results could be very skewed. Whoever took your poll probably has an agenda that is advantaged by equating Republicans with lunatics.

[Kaitlyn S]

duplicate post

[Al_U_Card]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:19, said:

it takes a lot of study to go from the mindset which I had to a mindset where I can read these posts and believe them.

The effort to assimilate and comprehend concepts dissonant with our own mindset is what broadens our horizons and ensures a perspective that allows our perceptions to be accurate and precise. Being convinced of the right and wrong of positions destroys those possibilities.

[Winstonm]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:34, said:

Winston, let's say our intelligence told us that North Korea had nuclear weapons that could wipe out a major American city with 90% probability, and that they planned to use them somehow in the next week on New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Phoenix, how would you suggest it be handled?

Plus, do you consider the possibility that the poll stating that 46% of Republicans support a preemptive strike against North Korea might has as much polling bias (or maybe just blatant lying) as the poll that states that 51% of Muslims in America support Sharia law?

https://www.centerfo...-shariah-jihad/

Note: the article implies this but I don't believe it. I would guess it's closer to 1 in 10 and that the owners of the site want you to believe that it's much higher than it really is. I only posted this to show you that your poll results could be very skewed. Whoever took your poll probably has an agenda that is advantaged by equating Republicans with lunatics.

Ahem. Puh-lease. Be serious.

(Wikipedia source)

Quote

The poll has been cited by major news outlets throughout North America and Europe, including The Washington Post,[5] Fox News,[6] USA Today,[7] The New York Times,[8] CNN,[9] and Reuters.[10] Quinnipiac University Poll receives national recognition for its independent surveys of residents throughout the United States. It conducts public opinion polls on politics and public policy as a public service as well as for academic research.[1][3] Andrew S. Tanenbaum, the founder of the poll-analysis website Electoral-vote.com, compared major pollsters' performances in the 2010 midterm Senate elections and concluded that Quinnipiac was the most accurate, with a mean error of 2.0 percent.[11][12]

In his most recent article on polling and polling institutes, well known American statistician and writer/editor-in-chief[13] of FiveThirtyEight, Nate Silver,[14] referred to the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.[15] In his article, "The State of the Polls 2016",[16] Silver stated,"The best-performing polls recently have been those from Monmouth University and those from Marist College. Both apply “gold standard” methodologies, using live telephone interviews and placing calls to cellphones as well as landlines, and both participate in the AAPOR Transparency Initiative. Quinnipiac University, another “gold standard” pollster, has also performed fairly well of late. So has Fox News, which switched to new polling partners in 2011 and has gotten good results since then.

Polling across the board shows that Republicans still support Trump by 80%. I rest my case.

[kenberg]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:34, said:

Winston, let's say our intelligence told us that North Korea had nuclear weapons that could wipe out a major American city with 90% probability, and that they planned to use them somehow in the next week on New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Phoenix, how would you suggest it be handled?

Plus, do you consider the possibility that the poll stating that 46% of Republicans support a preemptive strike against North Korea might has as much polling bias (or maybe just blatant lying) as the poll that states that 51% of Muslims in America support Sharia law?

https://www.centerfo...-shariah-jihad/

Note: the article implies this but I don't believe it. I would guess it's closer to 1 in 10 and that the owners of the site want you to believe that it's much higher than it really is. I only posted this to show you that your poll results could be very skewed. Whoever took your poll probably has an agenda that is advantaged by equating Republicans with lunatics.

You address Winston, but let me get into this anyway. One thing that I definitely would not want is for the decision to be left to the poll numbers. What I do want is someone in the White House, and yes in the Senate, the House and the cabinet, that I have some confidence in. That's just not where I am right now. And no, I wouldn't be that happy having the decision in Obama's hands. But there is bad, and then there is awful. Our current situation is awful. It's a tough situation for anyone in the oval office. Obviously that is so. But Trump? This is not good.

[Winstonm]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:19, said:

That is a legitimate criticism. My reason for doing so is that answering the personal remarks is easy, where answering the genuine responses requires research. I appreciate the genuine responses, and both have to think about them, and make sure they don't coincide with ideas listed as "fake news" elsewhere. This takes time - probably a lot more time for me than you because where these ideas are second nature to you, many of them are ideas that would be considered bull manure by most of the people I converse with. I am currently at the stage where I considering that some of what is being said here has a lot of merit, despite being led to believe that it's liberal nonsense being spewed by people who wish to keep minorities down so that they can keep them dependent on government and will be reelected forever.

I hope you realize that it takes a lot of study to go from the mindset which I had to a mindset where I can read these posts and believe them.

Kaitlyn,

I appreciate this considered response. FWIW, I searched the same way myself back in the 1990s. Nowadays, I will read anything that provides facts - I ignore the slant of the presentation. I read George Will and The Daily Beast.

In my view, the key issue is to avoid information sources who will either outright lie or withhold part of the story in order to support their own ideological agenda - Breitbart would be a prime example, and so would Sean Hannity. On the other side, the Palmer Report is quite liberal and is more a rumor mill than a news source, so I would avoid them as a news source.

I wish you well in looking deeper into your beliefs.

PS: I can understand people who do not think as I do, who are conservative in various ways. I don't very often agree but I know they may be right and I may be wrong. Not so with Donald Trump. I cannot fathom why there is any support at all for him - he is a clown, and a dangerous clown - an IT, if you will.

[hrothgar]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:34, said:

Winston, let's say our intelligence told us that North Korea had nuclear weapons that could wipe out a major American city with 90% probability, and that they planned to use them somehow in the next week on New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Phoenix, how would you suggest it be handled?

Plus, do you consider the possibility that the poll stating that 46% of Republicans support a preemptive strike against North Korea might has as much polling bias (or maybe just blatant lying) as the poll that states that 51% of Muslims in America support Sharia law?

https://www.centerfo...-shariah-jihad/

Note: the article implies this but I don't believe it. I would guess it's closer to 1 in 10 and that the owners of the site want you to believe that it's much higher than it really is. I only posted this to show you that your poll results could be very skewed. Whoever took your poll probably has an agenda that is advantaged by equating Republicans with lunatics.

"I'm scared" does not give one the right to kill a million innocent people - and lets be VERY clear - any significant military conflict on the Korean peninsula is going to result in the death of a million people, the destruction of Seoul, and a significant disruption in the international economy.

The last time America said "I'm scared" we invaded Iraq, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis died, the Middle East was completely destabilized and the US got its intelligence wrong.

Worse yet, it was demostrated that the reason that the US got the intelligence so wrong was deliberate interference by White House in the analytical process.

The world can not and should not tolerate an international regime in which the US randomly kills millions of people every now and then.

[RedSpawn]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:34, said:

Winston, let's say our intelligence told us that North Korea had nuclear weapons that could wipe out a major American city with 90% probability, and that they planned to use them somehow in the next week on New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Phoenix, how would you suggest it be handled?

Plus, do you consider the possibility that the poll stating that 46% of Republicans support a preemptive strike against North Korea might has as much polling bias (or maybe just blatant lying) as the poll that states that 51% of Muslims in America support Sharia law?

https://www.centerfo...-shariah-jihad/

Note: the article implies this but I don't believe it. I would guess it's closer to 1 in 10 and that the owners of the site want you to believe that it's much higher than it really is. I only posted this to show you that your poll results could be very skewed. Whoever took your poll probably has an agenda that is advantaged by equating Republicans with lunatics.

I'm still not convinced we have the perfect storm for a prelude to war in North Korea.

And what I find more interesting is that China is closer to North Korea than we are and yet its leaders are not having a "conniption fit" about all of Rocket Man's displays in their own back yard.

Our military industrial complex is probably angling for war and we have an additional $90 billion in the FY18 Department of Defense budget appropriations to start off the festivities.

And can we stop worrying about bumbling North Korea and do something about the fact that only 14% of Puerto Rico has electricity and the very water they are drinking may be coming from a toxic Superfund site?

Our government always seems to find extra money and time for North Korea and Afghanistan. However, when it comes to making sure Americans in Puerto Rico have decent potable water and electricity after a vicious hurricane landfall, our government provides trifling excuses about budgetary pressures and time constraints.

It's a bit ironic and convenient, don't you think?

[barmar]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 13:34, said:

Winston, let's say our intelligence told us that North Korea had nuclear weapons that could wipe out a major American city with 90% probability, and that they planned to use them somehow in the next week on New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Phoenix, how would you suggest it be handled?

But that's not what the poll asked. According to the WPost article, they were asked

Quote

whether the United States should continue with diplomacy or use a preemptive strike “to stop North Korea from continuing to develop nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.”

So we're not talking about preventing an imminent attack, but attacking them to prevent them from developing such weapons in the future.

They're reacting as if this is like the Cuban Missile Crisis. Perhaps they don't even realize how far North Korea is from a similar position, because Trump's rhetoric has played up their fear.

[Kaitlyn S]

Winstonm, on 2017-October-15, 15:38, said:

Polling across the board shows that Republicans still support Trump by 80%. I rest my case.

kenberg, on 2017-October-15, 15:39, said:

It's a tough situation for anyone in the oval office. Obviously that is so. But Trump? This is not good.

Winstonm, on 2017-October-15, 15:52, said:

Not so with Donald Trump. I cannot fathom why there is any support at all for him - he is a clown, and a dangerous clown - an IT, if you will.

I'm not sure if I was posting here when the primaries were going on, but I wanted anybody but Trump to win our primary. My actual primary vote went for Ted Cruz but in retrospect he probably would have been a disaster for the LGBT community who should have the same rights IMO as Christian straight people do. Probably Rubio or Kasich would have been a better choice. However, Trump won and faced off against Hillary. Trump could easily be a disaster, but I thought the country could survive Trump. I did not think the country could survive Hillary Clinton who I thought would pack the Supreme Court with several judges who would ignore the intent of our Founding Fathers. Say whatever you will about the vision the Founding Fathers had, but America went from thirteen fledgling colonies to the most powerful nation on the earth, which has enjoyed so much growth that if you pick a random disadvantaged black person that is in the 80% percentile (poorer than 80% of other blacks), he still enjoys a much higher standard of living that an average person of any race in probably half the world's nations. I am not saying "yeah they have it good, why should we improve their lot?" because I do not feel that way, and am all for fixing injustices in our own country, I only point this out to show that the principles put forth by the Founding Fathers have worked pretty well for us as a country, and would prefer that neither Hillary Clinton try to fundamentally change those principles, or to have Bernie Sanders try to replace it with socialism. which some scholars believe is the stepping stone to Communism which really hasn't worked all that well in practice in other nations.

Many of you have stopped reading already because you disagree so vehemently with my ideas, but for those of you who are still with me, I believe that Trump is less of a disaster than I expected so far. As long as we can keep him tweeting about the NFL players (and I agree that he looks pretty stupid there!), he isn't going to do any real damage. His overhaul of Obamacare went nowhere and I suspect the same is going to happen to his tax plan as that has even less Republican support than the healthcare bill. So, we might have four years where nothing gets done, which is usually a glorious time for investors who pay taxes, and we can use some deficit reduction. On the other hand, I still shudder to think about how worthless our Constitution would have become if Hillary Clinton had won the election and then picked up some seats in the midterm, although if she got to appoint two or three judges, checks and balances might become a moot point in this day of executive orders and legislating from the bench.

[Kaitlyn S]

RedSpawn, on 2017-October-15, 17:24, said:

.However, when it comes to making sure Americans in Puerto Rico have decent potable water and electricity after a vicious hurricane landfall, our government provides trifling excuses about budgetary pressures and time constraints..

I am very disappointed in the way we are handling the crisis in Puerto Rico - maybe worse than King George III treated the American Colonies.

[Kaitlyn S]

Irma's eye came within 15 miles of me but I was one of the lucky ones, only losing power for four days. Power restoration vehicles came from all over the country after helping our friends in Texas after Harvey struck.

Could we ferry some of those vehicles and their workers to Puerto Rico? If so, it should be done. These suffering people are American citizens. I'd like to see any infrastructure bill have a major provision for Puerto Rico so they can live like American citizens.

Some might say that PR shouldn't get infrastructure help because they don't pay federal tax. This is a silly argument as most Puerto Rican families would receive a credit and it would not surprise me if the IRS would lose money if PR were "taxed".

[PeterAlan]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 19:50, said:

... Trump could easily be a disaster, but I thought the country could survive Trump. I did not think the country could survive Hillary Clinton ... the principles put forth by the Founding Fathers have worked pretty well for us as a country, and would prefer that neither Hillary Clinton try to fundamentally change those principles ... I still shudder to think about how worthless our Constitution would have become if Hillary Clinton had won the election.

I'm a Brit, so my position and perspective is from the viewpoint of a world citizen, not as an American, but I find these statements and comparisons to be extraordinary. To most of us, Hillary Clinton seems far more normal, sane, rational and grounded than Donald Trump, but that's clearly not your perspective: you think she's worse than an "easily" possible Trump disaster.

You seem to have regarded last November's election as a pretty extreme choice between the potentially disastrous (Trump) and something even worse (Clinton), but did you never stop to ask yourself whether this could be the reality that you were faced with? In particular, did you ever question whether Mrs Clinton could really be that bad, or ask yourself how and why you had reached such a view about her? Where does all this "how worthless our Constitution would have become" come from?

[diana_eva]

PeterAlan, on 2017-October-16, 07:46, said:

Where does all this "how worthless our Constitution would have become" come from?

From ignorance. You missed some of the apocalyptic world views Kaytlin's been brainwashed into believing are imminent.

[y66]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 11:23, said:

Do you think that everyone who disagrees with you is a troll, or do you think that I really agree with you and am posting garbage on purpose?

If you look at my "Bidding Problems for I/N players" series, I think you can eliminate the second option, for as a troll, wouldn't I try to confuse the novices by giving believable nonsense for answers? I think everyone will agree that this isn't happening. You could say it is happening but then you might be labelled the troll by the rest of the site.

I read some of your bridge posts when you first started posting in the WC. I enjoyed them. Obviously it is possible to think logically in one problem domain and spout gibberish in another. I don't know anyone who doesn't do this. I suspect even kenberg and cherdano do this. Spouting gibberish is one thing. Spouting gibberish repeatedly for the express purpose of getting attention is trolling. Take the shame and please stop trolling this thread.

[diana_eva]

y66, on 2017-October-16, 11:55, said:

I read some of your bridge posts when you first started posting in the WC. I enjoyed them. Obviously it is possible to think logically in one problem domain and spout gibberish in another. I don't know anyone who doesn't do this. I suspect even kenberg and cherdano do this. Spouting gibberish is one thing. Spouting gibberish repeatedly for the express purpose of getting attention is trolling. Take the shame and please stop trolling this thread.

I don't think she's trolling. But she seems to lack a basic general knowledge of so many things, even US culture, that it's probably impossible to "learn" them all from a random water cooler thread. It's almost like she skipped all the elementary and highschool classes and jumped straight into 2016's Facebook feed to gather facts and information upon which to form an opinion.

[cherdano]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-October-15, 19:50, said:

I believe that Trump is less of a disaster than I expected so far. As long as we can keep him tweeting about the NFL players (and I agree that he looks pretty stupid there!), he isn't going to do any real damage. His overhaul of Obamacare went nowhere and I suspect the same is going to happen to his tax plan as that has even less Republican support than the healthcare bill.

Oh dear, you are really following some strange news sources. Just this week, Trump undertook several steps that try to blow up the individual market in the Obamacare exchanges. The silliest bit is stopping the Cost Sharing Reductions (CSR) - it makes premiums more expensive, reduces coverage, AND increases federal spending and the budget deficit.

Since you still haven't figured out which news sources you can rely on, it would probably cost you several hours to "research" these claims, when for any reasonably intelligent person who also has acquired reasonable instinct on reliability of news sources this would take a few minutes. (Oh, what a strange coincidence - the search "CSR site:foxnews.com" doesn't return any hits related to healthcare!! Who would have thought??)

[Zelandakh]

cherdano, on 2017-October-16, 13:36, said:

(Oh, what a strange coincidence - the search "CSR site:foxnews.com" doesn't return any hits related to healthcare!! Who would have thought??)

Here, here and here?

[Winstonm]

diana_eva, on 2017-October-16, 13:25, said:

I don't think she's trolling. But she seems to lack a basic general knowledge of so many things, even US culture, that it's probably impossible to "learn" them all from a random water cooler thread. It's almost like she skipped all the elementary and highschool classes and jumped straight into 2016's Facebook feed to gather facts and information upon which to form an opinion.

The U.S. needs to re-institute civics and critical thinking to the classroom.

[rmnka447]

Winstonm, on 2017-October-16, 14:55, said:

The U.S. needs to re-institute civics and critical thinking to the classroom.

Pray tell, Winnie, who removed Civics and History from our school curriculum? I don't think it was conservatives. It's more likely proponents of progressive education because they believe those subjects just aren't germane to the practical knowledge students need to get by in this world.