The Anti-Targ Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 The 4 conspiracy theory poll should be seen like exploratory research. Someone claims X, a bunch of people decide to do a simple study to see if there might be some validity to the claim of X. The small scale study suggests X could be valid, but because of the limited nature of the study you cannot reach a definitive conclusion. More research is needed. The poll suggests that even though belief in conspiracy theories is widespread across political ideologies and party affiliations, there may be a statistically significant difference between Republicans and Democrats. It is not proof of a difference, but it also certainly does not support a claim of no difference. So, assertions of either no difference or significant difference remain speculative. But an assertion of a significant difference existing is more supported by what little objective data there is available. Scientifically and statistically one should still assume that there is no difference but that more research is required to falsify the hypothesis, i.e. the hypothesis that there is a difference has not been invalidated. Or to put it another way, believe what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
all swedes are racist Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 8 hours ago, Fragile Bird said: And to continue with the games, Meanwhile in Canada is asking for captions. My personal favorite: https://mobile.twitter.com/pixelatedboat/status/831286357368528896 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 10 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said: Um, people who are tin foily and conspiracy theory nuts tend to vote Republican. Just saying. That's not to say some liberals and Democrats aren't also crackpots, but by and large, they vote conservative. Seriously, look at NWO, Agenda 21, the anti-vaxx movement (plenty of liberals in on that one), Obama is Coming for My Guns, Obama is a Kenyan Muslim, Sharia law, and of course who doesn't remember the good old days of FEMA and the X Files. That's not to mention money policy, the Bildebergers, the homosexual agenda to destroy our children, the list goes on and on and on. Let's not even talk about Trump. How many conspiracy theories has he peddled already? He's clearly missing his taped-together Buddy Holly glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 It's a pretty dumb thing imo, I'm not surprised theres not much research on it. Whats the upside of that conclusion? To give one political party something to brag about? Then once you establish which political party believes more conspiracy. The next question is why is one better than the other? What does believing in conspiracy less mean? Is someone better in some way because they believe in less conspiracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 9 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said: It's a pretty dumb thing imo, I'm not surprised theres not much research on it. Whats the upside of that conclusion? To give one political party something to brag about? Then once you establish which political party believes more conspiracy. The next question is why is one better than the other? What does believing in conspiracy less mean? Is someone better in some way because they believe in less conspiracy? Baby steps: Do you disagree with the studies that show that Fox viewers are (by a pretty significant margin) the most uninformed/misinformed viewers about current political events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 I feel a hefty round of connect the dots coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyKC Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Pizzagate is real Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 9 hours ago, Fragile Bird said: And to continue with the games, Meanwhile in Canada is asking for captions. DT: "See my fingers aren't short and fat!" JT: "Sure Donald, whatever you say." Or DT: "This is where your balls go for the next 4 years. Come on, up you get." JT "..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 I'm too classy to post my retort to that but it rhymes with Meorge Smush mid Mine Skeleven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 12 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said: I feel a hefty round of connect the dots coming. More like snakes and ladders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 28 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said: It's a pretty dumb thing imo, I'm not surprised theres not much research on it. Whats the upside of that conclusion? To give one political party something to brag about? Then once you establish which political party believes more conspiracy. The next question is why is one better than the other? What does believing in conspiracy less mean? Is someone better in some way because they believe in less conspiracy? There are a few valid conclusions you can draw about the set of people who believe in a lot of conspiracy theories vs the set of people who generally do not believe in conspiracy theories. Depending on your value judgements "better" is one term one might use to describe one group compared to another. But it is too vague a term to be meaningful. Less gullible. Less likely to be brainwashed. Less likely to believe the lies a populist politician tells and be swayed to vote based on those lies. More likely to vote a conspiracy theory believing nut into a position of political power. These are slightly more meaningful descriptions which may apply to one group over the other. And which may have some kind of socio-political impact on society. I think it is probably not terribly useful in itself to conclusively demonstrate the existence, or otherwise, of a partisan difference. But sociologically and psychologically there is probably merit in trying to figure out what makes people, especially otherwise sane (appearing) and socially functioning people, believe in crackpot conspiracy theories. I think some of it has been identified up thread, but I doubt that's the full story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 The Flynn story gets even crazier. Seems the US Army is investigating him for violation of the Emoluments Clause when he went on an unauthorized trip to Moscow in 2015. The insinuations here is some serious level treason. I cannot imagine this will ultimately end well for anyone as more and more shit get some leaked. Flynn, combined with Trumps tweet at the time of the sanctions, plus confirmations that elements of the Russian dossier are accurate and I just can't see how Trump will get through this. We aren't even through month one! ETA: Flynn resigns. No way this is the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horza Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 What an astonishing three weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Well, that's one shitheel down. Next question is whether or not he turns state's witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 4 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Well, that's one shitheel down. Next question is whether or not he turns state's witness. An old soldier boy? Maybe. Maybe not. Just as likely this is a public suicide so Trump and Pence, and various other skeezy Admin can distance themselves. If so, he'd have other incentives to keep his mouth shut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 1 hour ago, DunderMifflin said: Is someone better in some way because they believe in less conspiracy? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Just now, JEORDHl said: An old soldier boy? Maybe. Maybe not. Just as likely this is a public suicide so Trump and Pence, and various other skeezy Admin can distance themselves. If so, he'd have other incentives to keep his mouth shut. Flynn's not really an old soldier boy, however. One of the reasons he was fired in 2014 was because he was incredibly disloyal and acting fairly shady all over the place. Obama got tired of the backtalk and bullshit. And he went from working for Obama to...being interviewed and regularly appearing on RT and having dinner with Putin. Not exactly what one might call a bastion of patriotism, Flynn. Ultimately it depends more on the willingness and evidence to prosecute him for things like the Logan act or the emoluments that he violated in 2015, and how harsh that is. Given the, well, absurd amount of leaking we've had in just a couple days chances seem good to me that there's actual criminal acts that are possible here and a reasonable amount of evidence to that effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Here is likely domino number two... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Interesting discussions on CNN all night. The White House was told about Flynn's discussions with the Russian ambassador on Jan 23rd. They have sat on the story for three weeks. Speculation is, can Flynn be forced to testify before a Senate committee about his conversation? Someone suggested it was a protected conversation, but no, Trump had not been inaugurated yet so it isn't. Major question - did Trump instruct Flynn to tell the Russians not to worry about Obama's sanctions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 3 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Ultimately it depends more on the willingness and evidence to prosecute him for things like the Logan act or the emoluments that he violated in 2015, and how harsh that is. Given the, well, absurd amount of leaking we've had in just a couple days chances seem good to me that there's actual criminal acts that are possible here and a reasonable amount of evidence to that effect. Mmn... fair enough. It will be emoluments though, of the two. I was reading earlier how hard it would be to go after him with Logan (but a lot of it was over my head, so I could be wrong) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.