LDS Freedom Forum

SATAN'S FOLLY
Folks, these maroons will self-eliminate over time. Truly everything that satan embarks on becomes a mess. God builds, satan destroys. That is why you rarely find an engineer that is a democrat; because they usually logically back themselves into a corner - and then find themselves running for the exits....

My best man I was raised in Seattle and finally, after years of leftist indoctrination, started to pull his head out of his left arse. It took a while - but he loves money, and the taxes finally got to him, which opened his eyes up. Saved by the pocketbook, as it were.....

Same thing here in Alberta. After the oil downturn several years ago, the people were hurting with no jobs and they voted in a liberal maybe hoping for some free stuff to alleviate the pain caused by irrational exuberance of pretty much unlimited family budgets cut short.

Well, that did not go so well..... From a 4 billion surplus to a really nasty pile of debt.

Here is the eye-opener:
10 Poorest Cities in America (How did it happen?)
City, State, % of People Below the Poverty Level
1. Detroit , MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo , NY 29.9%
3 Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland , OH 27.0%
5. Miami , FL 26.9%
5 St. Louis , MO 26.8%
7. El Paso , TX 26.4%
8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
10. Newark , NJ 24.2%
(Now, watch closely... at no time will the fingers leave the hands...) What do these top ten cities (over 250,000 pop.) with the highest poverty rate all have in common?

Detroit, MI - (1st on poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961
Buffalo, NY - (2nd) hasn't elected one since 1954
Cincinnati, OH - (3rd) not since 1984
Cleveland, OH - (4th) not since 1989
Miami, FL - (5th) has never had a Republican mayor
St. Louis, MO - (6th) not since 1949
El Paso, TX - (7th) has never had a Republican mayor
Milwaukee, WI - (8th) not since 1908
Philadelphia, PA - (9th) not since 1952
Newark, NJ - (10th) not since 1907

Einstein once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

It is the poor who habitually elect Democrats ... yet they are still POOR.

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves."

~ Abraham Lincoln


"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him had better take a much closer look at the American Indian." ~ Henry Ford

Socialism (and all its variations, which are nothing more nor less than Satan's plan in mortality) destroys everything it touches.

kirtland r.m. wrote: ↑April 28th, 2019, 8:37 pm Here is the eye-opener:
10 Poorest Cities in America (How did it happen?)
City, State, % of People Below the Poverty Level
1. Detroit , MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo , NY 29.9%
3 Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland , OH 27.0%
5. Miami , FL 26.9%
5 St. Louis , MO 26.8%
7. El Paso , TX 26.4%
8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
10. Newark , NJ 24.2%
(Now, watch closely... at no time will the fingers leave the hands...) What do these top ten cities (over 250,000 pop.) with the highest poverty rate all have in common?

Detroit, MI - (1st on poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961
Buffalo, NY - (2nd) hasn't elected one since 1954
Cincinnati, OH - (3rd) not since 1984
Cleveland, OH - (4th) not since 1989
Miami, FL - (5th) has never had a Republican mayor
St. Louis, MO - (6th) not since 1949
El Paso, TX - (7th) has never had a Republican mayor
Milwaukee, WI - (8th) not since 1908
Philadelphia, PA - (9th) not since 1952
Newark, NJ - (10th) not since 1907

This analysis is all kinds of flawed. First of all, national party affiliation amounts to very little when you get down to city governance. Whether a mayor of a large city has an R or a D by their name is not likely to indicate how that city is run. Far more important, for starters, is to know whether the city is set up with a Strong Mayor or Council-Management (or Commission, or Hybrid, etc.) government type.

Furthermore, mayors tend to identify as Democrats regardless of their governing style. Of the 100 largest cities in the US, 61 mayors are Democrats. Large cities skew Democratic. If you looked at the 10 "richest" cities in America, you would find mostly Democratic mayors on that list as well.

What do you think would happen if you listed the states by poverty rate, and then looked at the party affiliations of their governors? (Or some other facile metric like whether they are "red" or "blue"?)

None of this means anything, it's just data mining and politics as team sport.

The observation that all the most poverty-ridden cities in America are run by Democrats is, to say the least, old news.

What I wish more people would talk about is the fact that the Democratic party is really a combination of the richest and poorest voters, while the middle class favors Republicans.

The state with the most income inequality is New York - run by Democrats. The state with the least inequality is Utah.

And yet Democrats have the country so sold on the fiction that they're the party of equality that practically everyone who lists "income inequality" as one of their concerns will vote Democrat.

Young people don't know about the USSR. Venezuela is to small to matter and USA meddling makes blame foggy for socialists. California will be (is) the next example of failed socialism.

captainfearnot wrote: ↑April 29th, 2019, 1:13 pm

kirtland r.m. wrote: ↑April 28th, 2019, 8:37 pm Here is the eye-opener:
10 Poorest Cities in America (How did it happen?)
City, State, % of People Below the Poverty Level
1. Detroit , MI 32.5%
2. Buffalo , NY 29.9%
3 Cincinnati , OH 27.8%
4. Cleveland , OH 27.0%
5. Miami , FL 26.9%
5 St. Louis , MO 26.8%
7. El Paso , TX 26.4%
8. Milwaukee , WI 26.2%
9. Philadelphia , PA 25.1%
10. Newark , NJ 24.2%
(Now, watch closely... at no time will the fingers leave the hands...) What do these top ten cities (over 250,000 pop.) with the highest poverty rate all have in common?

Detroit, MI - (1st on poverty rate list) hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961
Buffalo, NY - (2nd) hasn't elected one since 1954
Cincinnati, OH - (3rd) not since 1984
Cleveland, OH - (4th) not since 1989
Miami, FL - (5th) has never had a Republican mayor
St. Louis, MO - (6th) not since 1949
El Paso, TX - (7th) has never had a Republican mayor
Milwaukee, WI - (8th) not since 1908
Philadelphia, PA - (9th) not since 1952
Newark, NJ - (10th) not since 1907

This analysis is all kinds of flawed. First of all, national party affiliation amounts to very little when you get down to city governance. Whether a mayor of a large city has an R or a D by their name is not likely to indicate how that city is run. Far more important, for starters, is to know whether the city is set up with a Strong Mayor or Council-Management (or Commission, or Hybrid, etc.) government type.

Furthermore, mayors tend to identify as Democrats regardless of their governing style. Of the 100 largest cities in the US, 61 mayors are Democrats. Large cities skew Democratic. If you looked at the 10 "richest" cities in America, you would find mostly Democratic mayors on that list as well.

What do you think would happen if you listed the states by poverty rate, and then looked at the party affiliations of their governors? (Or some other facile metric like whether they are "red" or "blue"?)

None of this means anything, it's just data mining and politics as team sport.

I don't agree. The conditions in the cities above, go far beyond who is governor. They are hard core liberal areas which have been run by libs. for generations, it shows!

kirtland r.m. wrote: ↑April 29th, 2019, 6:15 pm I don't agree. The conditions in the cities above, go far beyond who is governor. They are hard core liberal areas which have been run by libs. for generations, it shows!

You need look no further than Salt Lake City to disprove the notion that any conclusions about a city as a whole can be drawn from the party affiliation of the mayor. SLC has a low poverty rate at 10.2% and has had Democratic mayors since the 70s.

What about the rest of the nation's richest cities (according to poverty level)? San Francisco really is a hardcore liberal area, with Democratic mayors since the 60s. Poverty rate is 10%.

Denver. Honolulu. Portland. San Jose. Seattle. Austin. Same story. Poverty rates in the low double digits, all with Democratic mayors for decades.

captainfearnot wrote: ↑April 29th, 2019, 8:26 pm

kirtland r.m. wrote: ↑April 29th, 2019, 6:15 pm I don't agree. The conditions in the cities above, go far beyond who is governor. They are hard core liberal areas which have been run by libs. for generations, it shows!

You need look no further than Salt Lake City to disprove the notion that any conclusions about a city as a whole can be drawn from the party affiliation of the mayor. SLC has a low poverty rate at 10.2% and has had Democratic mayors since the 70s.

What about the rest of the nation's richest cities (according to poverty level)? San Francisco really is a hardcore liberal area, with Democratic mayors since the 60s. Poverty rate is 10%.

Denver. Honolulu. Portland. San Jose. Seattle. Austin. Same story. Poverty rates in the low double digits, all with Democratic mayors for decades.

Wait, are we solely talking about poverty rates here? I thought the discussion was about the conditions of these cities as a whole, which includes far more than mere poverty stats. For example, in San Francisco, even in the nicest areas, you have to step very carefully so as to avoid all the piles of human excrement strewn all over the sidewalks. I wonder who is crapping all over the public sidewalks in low-poverty-rate San Francisco, the rich people?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrze ... 61ea405ea5

EmmaLee wrote: ↑April 30th, 2019, 2:13 pm Wait, are we solely talking about poverty rates here? I thought the discussion was about the conditions of these cities as a whole, which includes far more than mere poverty stats.

Not according to OP. It's strictly a specious correlation between poverty rate in cities over 250,000 in population and the political affiliation of their mayors.

I think you and I are on the same page, actually, just coming at it from different angles. I'm saying you can't tell anything about the overall governance of a city from one data point (R or D mayor). You're saying that you can't tell much about the overall standard of living in a city based on one data point (poverty rate). I think we agree that it's much more complex than that.