Senate Special Election in MA

[Leif]

Ah I guess my confusion comes from the fact that neither me nor the other poster said anything about "listening to me lately". Not dredging up the other thread but in this one the post you responded to simply asked if you read the bill which has nothing to do with the person who made the post.

Leif is here!

Did you even read the republican proposals? If you did, even if you only read 1/20th of the bill the proposed, you would see that they only serve exemplify everything i have been writing about.

See.

[zoobernut]

Wrong, all the networks gave the same amount of coverage time to the election and speeches. So in that time frame you cannot exceed 100%. MATH YOU.

You are so stupid sometimes. The graph is referring to the percentage of the speech covered it has nothing to do with time or total time or anything you think it does.

100% = Full speech covered.

100%> = Less than the full speech covered.

The graph only means that supposedly ( I am not arguing the validity of the source of the graph or the accuracy of the graph at all ) Fox showed 100% of both speeches. And the other networks showed 100% of the D speech and only part of the R speech.

Don't be so quick to tell someone they need to learn math when you can't even read a simple bar graph.

Edit: Ah I see what you are talking about in that post Leif. Well I guess then I am only confused why you said it in the other thread but that thread is gone and doesn't matter anymore anyway.

[Leif]

wut lol
it means it fox news carried all of the speeches of both candidates, while the other networks did not cover much of the republican candidate.
whats hard to understand here >.>

100% = all of that person's speeches

Thank you...

Wrong, all the networks gave the same amount of coverage time to the election and speeches. So in that time frame you cannot exceed 100%. MATH YOU.

Provably incorrect. For help, ask your fellow liberals.

[Leif]

I also apologize if I ever called zoobernut or anyone who can successfully read this bar graph stupid.

I have since revised my definition of stupid.

Edit: Ah I see what you are talking about in that post Leif. Well I guess then I am only confused why you said it in the other thread but that thread is gone and doesn't matter anymore anyway.

In other news, I now know who you are!

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

You're morons. There was a set block of time to cover the elections, say 5 hours, so you can't cover 200% of 100% of material... DUH

[Demosthenes11]

You're morons. There was a set block of time to cover the elections, say 5 hours, so you can't cover 200% of 100% of material... DUH

captain going down with his ship?
you are allowed to admit when you are wrong, especially on such a stupid minor thing lol

[Effluo]

You're morons. There was a set block of time to cover the elections, say 5 hours, so you can't cover 200% of 100% of material... DUH

Can not math. That explains a lot

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

I need to make a fake conservative poster account that shit is fun. Now you all see how the conservatives trolls look.

[Leif]

OH. MY. GOD.

http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/blog...s/speeches.jpg

Percentage of candidate speeches carried on election night.....The percentage of Scott Brown's and Martha Coakley's speech carried on election night.
Coakley(D) Brown (R).... Separating which color represents each candidate

0 20 40 60 80 100.... Y axis.... percentage of each candidate's speech

CNN MSNBC FOXNEWS ... X axis... Each divided into blue and red... blue for coakley... red for brown...

I need to make a fake conservative poster account that shit is fun. Now you all see how the conservatives trolls look.

Like people who can read bar graphs?

[zoobernut]

You're morons. There was a set block of time to cover the elections, say 5 hours, so you can't cover 200% of 100% of material... DUH

Seriously you are so wrong on this, it is ok to just say you are wrong.

Ok to spell it out for you: The graph does not say ANYTHING about a set amount of time. It doesn't have time as a scale, it doesn't say percent of time, it doesn't say anything. The red and blue columns are DISCRETE from each other. I will wait for you to go look up what discrete means.


Good? OK.

Also lol Leif nice jab at me...


Edit: Finesse just because sometimes you are dense I will say it again, this has nothing to do with conservative vs. liberal it is a math thing and you are not getting it. I don't even care about what the graph is about I am just trying to explain to you how the graph was written so you can understand it.

[Leif]

I love it when I unite with liberals on something!

[Effluo]

.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

.

Someones mad they got troll't lolol

[Cratylus]

Oh we caught a dense one!

So you're insinuating firefighters and police should be free market? Just like healthcare is now, this would be really effective.

Please lay out your case why taxation is bad, this should be good.

You stated something was "free" I am simply stating that is not the case because it is in fact paid for via taxes, which it will noted you in no way contradict in your response.

I did not suggest nor even begin to imply in anyway shape or form anything ought or ought not be free market nor did I even take up the topic of taxation, qua taxation.

With that in mind, should I ask you why you think that fire trucks should be blue, since you neither suggested they should be nor was it the topic at hand?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

Edit: Finesse just because sometimes you are dense I will say it again, this has nothing to do with conservative vs. liberal it is a math thing and you are not getting it. I don't even care about what the graph is about I am just trying to explain to you how the graph was written so you can understand it.

Yes, you are very dense. As is anyone that actually argues Leif or Egon on a serious level as I have clearly proven you cannot "debate" blatant stupidity.

Thank you come again!

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

You stated something was "free" I am simply stating that is not the case because it is in fact paid for via taxes, which it will noted you in no way contradict in your response.

I did not suggest nor even begin to imply in anyway shape or form anything ought or ought not be free market nor did I even take up the topic of taxation, qua taxation.

With that in mind, should I ask you why you think that fire trucks should be blue, since you neither suggested they should be nor was it the topic at hand?

Are you paying higher taxes for firefighters and police, or is budgeted from taxes you already pay? When you are helped by firefighters or police officers, do you pay them or are you billed?

Taxation is a way of life, it is how communities pool money to survive. You're a moron for putting this into a "charity vs. profit" scenario as it is clearly not the context.

[Leif]

Yes, you are very dense. As is anyone that actually argues Leif or Egon on a serious level as I have clearly proven you cannot "debate" blatant stupidity.

Thank you come again!

What . . .

[Plow]

When Sarah Palin said it, she was right.

wow, and this whole time I thought leif was really this dumb, I guess it was pretty obvious all along tho really

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

What . . .

I did what you did and pulled some random shit out of my ass and argued it as a conservative bias. Look, it worked, I got all these responses by playing ignorant and just barreling my own brand of logic down your throats.

I have to give it to you Leif, your tactic is effective as hell.

[Leif]

Are you paying higher taxes for firefighters and police, or is budgeted from taxes you already pay?

At some point, someone said, "Let's have firefighters and the police!" Then they raised taxes to pay for it.

Taxation is a way of life, it is how communities pool money to survive.

Sure, but this is like saying "a glass of wine a day helps your heart" as proof of "everyone should get drunk".

You're a moron for putting this into a "charity vs. profit" scenario as it is clearly not the context.

What's the context?