Total posts: 28,020
The movie "Sound of Freedom" is making waves in Hollywood and the mainstream media. Despite its small budget of $14 million and limited promotion, it has achieved remarkable success at the box office. It even outperformed "Indiana Jones" and is competing well against a massive-budget Disney movie on a per-theater basis. However, some in the woke media are having a meltdown over the movie's message about child trafficking prevention, branding it as "Q-Anon adjacent" and trashing it in liberal outlets.
The movie is based on a true story about child trafficking, and its success challenges the notion that addressing human trafficking is a political message. It portrays the work of Tim Ballard and his organization, Operation Underground Railroad, which rescues children from slavery and trafficking rings. The movie has received criticism from certain far left whack media outlets, such as The Guardian and Jezebel, who are quick to dismiss it as a conspiracy or a paranoid thriller.
Critics of the movie fail to acknowledge that it is based on real-life events and highlights a serious issue. The movie's core story is based on the work of an actual charitable organization dedicated to combating child trafficking. Despite attempts to politicize it, the movie's aim is not political; it focuses on raising awareness about a real pressing problem.
The backlash against "Sound of Freedom" reveals a double standard in the media. Woke Outlets like Rolling Stone and The Washington Post praised controversial films like "Cuties," which faced accusations of sexualizing young girls. However, they are quick to attack a movie that addresses human trafficking and child slavery, undermining its importance.
Despite these crazed partisan attacks, "Sound of Freedom" continues to resonate with audiences and exceed expectations at the box office. Its success should raise eyebrows in Hollywood. The media's fierce opposition is a response to this movie's impact. Despite attempts to discredit it, the movie's powerful message and real-world relevance make it a compelling watch over the trite woke crap.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Lol, again, don't make the statement vague.
Use Trump or Melania's name going forward so people don't get the idea that the FBI does not consider the Biden family to be an effective team.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Why do you keep dissing Biden with that quote? The FBI considers Biden to be a valuable asset.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
Wapo is so trash.
Only a fascist capitalist media outlet like Wapo could be so brazen about promoting support for an overtly tyrannical and openly corrupt government.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
What's the difference between the 2 categories?
Your answer should be in this format:
Category A means:
and Category B means:
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
What do you think the difference is between the category "at this point" on the 24 week row and the category "In all cases no exceptions"
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
More guns isn't a solution. It's inevitable as technology makes it as easy to get as a shopping cart. Just like the 1930 bootleggers learned how to make their own banned alcohol with the technology available at the time.
Before a lot of guns, you could ignore crazy people. Now society will be forced to deal with crazy, violent people for the preservation of society instead of letting them roam wild.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
That's not what the poll says. If you want me to break out the photoshop and circle the English words on the poll, I can do that for you.
And I'd bet you most of the people being polled didn't know...
Now you are guessing instead of reading the English words on the poll. Seems like you may have unconsciously projected your error onto me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
He was probably saying why the feds should leave him alone.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
The poll clearly says 19% want abortions in all cases with no exceptions.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
I agree, milk is nasty. Plus overhyped. It's essentially water with cow parts in it.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
Seems like the only one with irrational and impulsive feelings is you with the commonplace demagoguery.
Maybe try logic and reason? Using demagoguery only makes conversation impossible, and tyranny to deal with "gun nuts" should be the last resort to solving any problem. Tyrannical force used to deal with "ban nuts" should be tempered as well.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
gun nuts..
Would you feel like the term "ban nuts" is justified?
You often lose credibility with your arguments when you demonize people with different lives with "pop slurs" as the commonplace rantings of a demagogue.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Most mass shooters come from fatherless homes. Especially teens.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
allegedly assaulting...
So an allegation or a restraining order is sufficient to violate constitutional rights in 2023?
Did you research how easily people can obtain restraining orders? You can literally slap yourself in the face, take a picture, or get a buddy to testify, and get a compliant judge to sign off on it. Happens all the time, especially in divorce situations.
If this case is upheld, perhaps it will give cause for serious reform of the current system of restraining orders.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
One of those polls was an exit poll, but We can compare exit polls with the numbers of the other polls and see if they line up.
That way we can both work together to find the truth instead of relying on sample sizes of one.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
Nah fam, I just read the number off the poll. Specifically I read off the number 19% on one poll 6% on another poll, and 15% an a 3rd poll.
Not really sure what you are asking in good faith here.
Created:
Created:
A poll with a sample size of one is inherently unreliable and cannot be considered a valid representation of a population. The reason why we conduct a poll is to gather data from a sufficiently representative sample to make inferences about the larger population. A sample size of one does not meet even the most basic requirements of statistical sampling and cannot provide any meaningful or reliable information.
here are some common reasons why your sample of one isn't as valid:
- A single individual cannot represent the diversity and characteristics of an entire population. A proper sample reflects the demographics, opinions, and characteristics of the population being studied. A single person's perspective isn't able capture the vast range of opinions and variation present in a larger population.
- Sampling error refers to the variability that naturally occurs when taking a sample from a population. With a sample size of one, there is no possibility of measuring or accounting for sampling error since there is no variation or multiple observations to compare. The lack of multiple data points makes it impossible to estimate the level of confidence or margin of error in the results. As a result, even the margin of error is invalid as it is incalculable.
- Reliable conclusions are based on data that can be independently verified and replicated. A single observation cannot be verified or cross-checked by other researchers, making it highly susceptible to bias, random chance, or individual idiosyncrasies, or just plain incoherence.
A sample size that is generally accepted as statistically sufficient, and is more representative of the population, and also allows for estimation of an actual sampling error is far more reliable within the margins of error than your sample size of one. Larger sample sizes increase the reliability of the findings and allow for better statistical analysis and more accurate inference of the general population within smaller margins of error.
Hillary's pay to play polls were also within the calculated margin of error and accurately predicted her popular vote victory. The fact that analysts were using popular vote to extrapolate an electorate victory was not the fault of the polls.
Agree?
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
I never claimed that. I claimed pay to play polls are often wrong.
But I also do agree with you that your poll with a sample size of 1 is wrong.
We can delve into the orders of magnitude of wrongness if you want to find a disagreement.
And you are welcome.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
So your poll with a sample size of one is wrong. OK.
Created:
You offered me a poll with the sample size of one.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
So are polls with a sample size of one.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
Pay to play polls. Sure.
Created:
-->
@Vegasgiants
That poll had 15% say abortion is their top concern. Since the poll was just taken on the heels of the Roe decision, it's likely that 15% is the ceiling for Abortion concerns. Meaning, it won't matter as much if people are upset with the economy in 2024.
But, I suppose a targeted propaganda campaign funded by big lobbies might change that. Pay to play as usual.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
@Sidewalker
Probably because nobody ever said that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vegasgiants
I gave you 2 examples where there was. PM me for more examples if you want more.
Created:
Posted in:
You are trying to forecast future problems that may or may not happen
This is our historical record. You decide what the trend is.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I don't think there are very many, if any, people who want an abortion to be an option like the day before the due date...
My poll showed 19% of people want this. What you think with your sample size of one doesn't match up with the pew poll.
Created:
Posted in:
Debt to GDP ratio is a major factor in assessing credit risk. That's the correlation.
A higher debt-to-GDP ratio indicates that a country's debt is relatively large compared to its economic output. This can raise concerns about the government's ability to manage its debt, make interest payments, and maintain fiscal stability. It suggests a higher risk of default or challenges in meeting debt obligations.
Credit rating agencies like Moody's consider the debt-to-GDP ratio, (among other factors) when assessing a country's creditworthiness. A higher debt-to-GDP ratio may lead credit rating agencies to lower a country's credit rating or revise their outlook on its creditworthiness. This can result in higher borrowing costs for the government and potentially affect investor confidence. that cost is passed down to every American.
One real-world example of a country that experienced a downgrade in its credit rating as its debt-to-GDP ratio increased is Greece. Greece faced a severe debt crisis around the late 2000s and early 2010s, which resulted in a significant downgrade of credit rating.
Prior to the crisis, Greece had accumulated a high level of public debt relative to its GDP. As the country's debt burden increased, concerns grew about its ability to meet its financial obligations, including making interest payments on its debt.
Credit rating agencies, such as Standard & Poor's, Moody's, and Fitch Ratings, downgraded Greece's credit rating during the crisis. The downgrades reflected the increasing risk associated with lending to Greece, as the country's debt levels became unsustainable relative to its economic output. The downgrades contributed to higher borrowing costs for the Greek government and heightened market concerns about its ability to manage its debt. Greece then had to pay much higher payments on the accumulated debt.
The Greek debt crisis serves as a historic example of how a high debt-to-GDP ratio can contribute to a loss of credit rating.
Argentina had a similar crisis in 2001 and 2018. PM me if you want more examples.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
fed fed fed
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vegasgiants
Sure it does. Interest rates are based on our projected GDP. If our GDP falls (value of equity on our national debt), creditors are going to ask for more through higher interest rates as we don't have as much ability to pay back our debts.
If the government's ability to generate revenue and meet its financial obligations is compromised, it may result in increased borrowing or a higher perceived risk of default. In response, lenders may demand higher interest rates to compensate for the perceived increased risk associated with lending to the government. This can lead to a rise in national debt interest payments.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vegasgiants
You cant name a single problem the debt causes.
Created:
-->
@HistoryBuff
According to my poll, there's a narrow window of bipartisan consensus within a specific framework.
The real question is if politicians are willing to piss a few people off bigly to get something done for the majority. Like, it's OK to tell the abortion on demand through the 3rd trimester crowd to take a back seat.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
According to my poll, it's entirely possible to have a right to abortion up to 14 weeks with exemptions pass Congress.
But I guess if it's easier to get a up to 6 week right to abort with exceptions, then sure, pass that, then build on that.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
"pretty please can we violate the bill or rights?"
I actually got a little depressed when Pool deadpan listed the constitutional violations of the current administration in the order of the bill of rights.
This is the new normal.
Created:
-->
@TWS1405_2
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
They stopped transmitting it.
Not necessarily. There are studies that said significant asymptomatic transmission happened with people who previously recovered from Covid, vaccinated or not. There's no magic "flu bullet"
Created:
-->
@FLRW
Let's see it.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
By my poll, 44% Americans support abortion in all cases up to 6 weeks.
To codify Roe's 20 week suggestion, only 22% support this with no exceptions.
Maybe you should consider some exemptions and/or maybe lower your cutoff date?
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The pandemic is over because of the vaccine...
Since the mandates are over, guess they are not as effective now as they once were when they said the mandates were necessary.
Anything the government does is effective of course.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
What would a bipartisan Constitutional law enshrining those rights look like to you?
Created:
Nice statistical source with a sample size of one.
This one claims 19% support for 7-9th month abortions.
Unless you think Democrats are only 19% of the country, that means a large number of Democrats do not want this codified. This is one of the reasons why the 2022 Abortion bill was struck down with bi-partisan dissent.
According to that poll, the only bill that would get bipartisan support is a right to abort within the 1st trimester.
Created:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The vaccine was effectiveIt wasn’t 100% effective
So it didn't 100% stop the transmission of the virus?
Dang.
Wonder why they said for over a year that it 100% did?
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
That group may be a minority, but it also splits the remaining votes of the other 3 groups so that there won't be a 51% consensus. This is the failure of democracy, when there are no binary choices.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
It's a big problem because you have 4 dominant camps.
One wants abortion on demand legal up to 9 months.
Another wants abortion legal up to 20 weeks (codifying Roe)
Another wants abortion legal up to an arbitrary time set by a doctor... (that proposed law failed in Congress last year with bipartisan dissent)
And still another group wants abortions federally banned except in rare exceptions where a C-section can't save both the mother and the baby and the fetus must be killed instead to save the mother.
Without a consensus in this culture war, there won't be any unifying Federal law.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
but also at the same time say that we shouldn't make it illegal...
What would a bipartisan Constitutional law enshrining those rights look like to you?
Created: