A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 57 of 725
Quote:29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans. Obviously, some of those "Conservatives" are not Republicans, but that doesn't make them Commies, does it?
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicalscience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pd
f
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative.
Originally posted by second:Quote:29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicalscience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pd
f
57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates.
This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.
This comingled group ranked Obama 16th Greatest President? Yep, they were Commies.
And these esteemed "political Scientists" were so clueless that, when asked which President should be ADDED to Mt. Rushmore, 5 of the 170 respondents voted for Washington, T Roosevelt, Lincoln. Hint: they are already there.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's funny to watch trolls challenge our best and brightest. They actually believe when they are doing so, that they are perceived as smart, and that they are not perceived as trolls who are, well trolling.
Reality eludes the likes of Jack, JSF, Rappy, sig and kiki. Lost to them, is the fact that their being trolls makes them losers.
T 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:One thing to notice with this survey, there is no weighted balance, which Libtards hate to do when they have 82% of their respondents as Liberals, and 5% Conservatives.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative.
Originally posted by second:Quote:29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.
https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicalscience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pd
f
57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates.
This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.
This comingled group ranked Obama 16th Greatest President? Yep, they were Commies.
And these esteemed "political Scientists" were so clueless that, when asked which President should be ADDED to Mt. Rushmore, 5 of the 170 respondents voted for Washington, T Roosevelt, Lincoln. Hint: they are already there.
Although they were able to obfuscate the actual figures for the 5% Conservatives, enough data is exposed that we can extrapolate and interpolate data to find a more accurate ranking.
A Gallup poll shows that Americans self-identify as 38% Conservative and 24% Liberal, so those figures can be used to weight the results for balance.
Since the study admits the Liberals, Somewhat Liberals, and self-identified Moderates are essentially the same, these can be used as the sample of "Liberals" representing the 24%. First I calculated the overall figure among the 2 columns (Libs & Mods). The list below shows the resulting balanced Rank, and then balanced Rating, for the first 2 columns. The next 2 columns of Rank and Rating are results if we pretend that PoliSci experts who self-identify as "Moderates" are really not Liberals (and those results are not used in weighted balancing). In the 5th column I included the Rank presented in the Report. Then the Name and sequence number.
#1 93.71 #1 93.92 #1 95.03 Lincoln 16
#2 93.39 #2 93.48 #2 92.59 Washington 1
#3 83.52 #3 84.36 #3 89.09 FDR 32
#4 78.30 #4 78.39 #4 81.39 T Roosevelt 26
#5 77.06 #5 77.46 #5 79.54 Jefferson 3
#6 74.54 #6 73.36 #9 69.24 Reagan 40
#7 73.25 #8 72.78 #7 74.03 Eisenhower 34
#8 72.65 #7 73.05 #6 75.15 Truman 33
#9 64.16 10 63.53 17 60.90 Bush 41
10 62.60 14 62.09 15 62.16 Jackson 7
11 62.44 #9 63.99 #8 71.13 Obama 44
12 62.39 13 62.59 14 63.24 Adams 2
13 62.35 12 62.93 12 64.48 Madison 4
14 62.16 11 63.41 10 69.06 LB Johnson 36
15 62.12 18 60.55 19 55.49 McKinley 25
16 61.89 15 62.00 13 64.25 Clinton 42
17 61.23 17 61.36 18 60.74 Monroe 5
18 60.94 16 61.43 11 67.40 Wilson 28
19 57.45 19 56.35 20 54.09 Polk 11
20 56.59 21 56.08 22 51.96 Taft 27
21 55.5
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
It's funny to watch trolls challenge our best and brightest. Who actually believe when they are doing so, that they are perceived as smart, and that they are not perceived as trolls who are, well trolling.
Reality eludes the likes of Jack, JSF, Rappy, sig and kiki. Lost to them, is the fact that their being trolls makes them losers.
Let me summarize T's post for everyone:
Insult, insult, insult, insult, dur....
Wipe the drool off your keyboard, T.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Schiff: Inexplicable Why Trump Sitting On Russia Sanctions
https://www.iheart.com/content/2018-02-19-schiff-inexplicable-why-trum
p-sitting-on-russia-sanctions/
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here Jack, have a carrot.
come on take it...
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'll ask again. Where are all those who posted over and over again about Hillary being a security risk. You were relentless, as though you really cared about our national security. Huh...guess you don't care after all. You must have been trolling huh? Come on admit it. You're trolls...
And Benghazi trolls, where are you??? Our national security is at risk like never before yet silence. You must have been trolling huh? Admit it, you're trolls.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What’s Killing Liberalism?
www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/liberalism-trump-era/5535
53/
It is fair to say that all early liberals would have accepted Adam Smith’s proposition that prosperity will be best served if men are given free rein to pursue their self-interest. Yet by the end of the 19th century, as the industrial economy both raised living standards and plunged workers—now equipped with the vote—into appalling conditions in factories and mines, the doctrine of laissez-faire became both politically and morally unsustainable to liberals themselves. In 1909, Herbert Croly published The Promise of American Life, an immensely influential book that argued that Jeffersonian individualism no longer offered a real guarantee of freedom. “The democratic principle requires an equal start in the race,” Croly wrote, but so long as private property was sacred, equal rights could not guarantee equal opportunity to citizens not born to privilege. Liberalism could not be satisfied merely with the promise of equal rights. . . .
In his famous speech announcing the advent of the Great Society, LBJ used Croly’s metaphor of the unequal race. But by the 1960s it was not white middle-class American who needed state intervention, but minorities, above all African Americans, who had been left behind as America became a broadly prosperous nation. This moral commitment carried obvious political dangers, for liberals were now asking Americans to make sacrifices for others. By the end of the decade, liberalism had begun to lose its hold on the white working-class, once the prime beneficiary of government programs. Liberalism has never regained its appeal for those voters. By 1980, the abandoned laissez-faire tradition had revived, and left-liberalism had been replaced by Ronald Reagan’s right-liberalism of small government, low taxes, and free-market economics. (This is over-simplifying, of course, for Reagan also ran against liberal secularism and liberal doubts about American power and virtue.)
The Democrats responded to their marginalization by dropping the tainted word “liberal” and accepting crucial parts of the Reagan program. “Neoliberals” or advocates of a “Third Way” like Bill Clinton endorsed the conservative emphasis on economic growth but applied liberal principles of social justice to public investment and the distribution of wealth; they aspired to forge a liberalism of the middle class. The right-liberal and left-liberal parties traded power; each appeared to have almost exactly half the country on its side. Then, in 2016, the seesaw stopped: Both parties were rejected in favor of a candidate who simultaneously attacked Wall Street and the welfare state, professed little regard for individual rights and none for free speech, opposed globalization and free trade, and called for the country to erect a wall against pretty much the entire outside world.
Donald Trump’s election has thus provoked a crisis of identity both for the party of the market and the party of the state. Conservatives need to rescue their own party, now marshaled under Trump’s populist banner. Liberals have a problem of a different order; they need to reconstruct their faith as they did in 1912 and 1964 and 1992, when they learned or relearned how to speak to the broad middle of the country. Or rather, liberals need to decide whether that is their goal. Can they, should they, seek to address the deep sense of grievance that the election exposed? Politically, after all, they may not need to: Trump’s base is melting down to the hard core, and Democrats may return to power simply by letting his party self-destruct, and by mobilizing a base fired up by righteous fury. . . .
I doubt whether the near-obsession with identity issues can be uprooted from the heart of the Democratic Party. But liberalism’s appeal has always sprung from its commitment to the language of collective interest—the language of “we.” This offers liberalism a platform very different from the insistent “I” of conservatism, and the “they” of populism—the not-us, whethe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
GOP rattled by Pennsylvania congressional race in the heart of Trump country
The dismayed laborers from shuttered coal yards and steel mills didn't have to shift political allegiances to vote for President Trump in this part of the Rust Belt. They had been electing Republicans long before he showed up on the ballot.
That explains why party leaders in a congressional district stretching from the Pittsburgh suburbs to the West Virginia border are so panicked that their candidate is flailing, with a special election only weeks away.
A poor showing here would signal trouble for the midterm elections in November, in which GOP control of the House and Senate hangs in the balance. Republicans are trying to hold on to a seat being vacated by once popular Rep. Tim Murphy, who resigned after the disclosure of text messages in which the pro-life crusader pressured his mistress to seek an abortion.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-rust-belt-gop-congress-20180
222-story.html
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME