Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Sally, that's a research ranking. It's not a ranking of undergraduate education. And it only considers things like "The number of papers published in Nature and Science between 2013 and 2017". Larger schools will have a higher score in all of their categories.

Here is a ranking system much more heavily weighed on foreign universities but still has UT Austin 63 - and Fat Hurts ranks them like 550.

https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2019

Something is not right with you. The comments I posted are from WORLD ACADEMICS about the failure of the Shanghai Ranking, AND from the authors themselves warning people to NOT take the rankings so seriously. In other words, it is not the "gold standard."

Shanghai Ranking wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

I appreciate your concerns. But The Shanghai rankings are still considered the gold standard. US News and World Report? That is laughable - so much of the rankings are affected by advertising dollars.

Name a ranking program you deem more worthy than the Shanghai one. I would love to look in to.

Something is not right with you. The comments I posted are from WORLD ACADEMICS about the failure of the Shanghai Ranking, AND from the authors themselves warning people to NOT take the rankings so seriously. In other words, it is not the "gold standard."

okay here is another rankings system - UT is 22 in the nation and 31 IN THE WORLD. Nothing wrong with me. UT Austin a very great university. Second richest (or maybe third) university in the country.

US News is the one most people look at for undergraduate rankings. It's not a good tool to decide where to attend, but it's what most people are talking about when they discuss college rank.

I still don't think you got into UT Austin.

Sally Vix wrote:

Shanghai Ranking wrote:

Something is not right with you. The comments I posted are from WORLD ACADEMICS about the failure of the Shanghai Ranking, AND from the authors themselves warning people to NOT take the rankings so seriously. In other words, it is not the "gold standard."

okay here is another rankings system - UT is 22 in the nation and 31 IN THE WORLD. Nothing wrong with me. UT Austin a very great university. Second richest (or maybe third) university in the country.

Foolish Sally. UT is a system if NINE schools. Dived by NINE before comparing them to other singular schools.

Fat hurts wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

I appreciate your concerns. But The Shanghai rankings are still considered the gold standard. US News and World Report? That is laughable - so much of the rankings are affected by advertising dollars.

Name a ranking program you deem more worthy than the Shanghai one. I would love to look in to.

US News is the one most people look at for undergraduate rankings. It's not a good tool to decide where to attend, but it's what most people are talking about when they discuss college rank.

I still don't think you got into UT Austin.

You have problems with the english language, you have no idea how to use the past passive, you think there are 100s of schools worldwide that are ranked higher than UT Austin, and you are saying you don't think I got into UT when I had a 3.99 GPA. Seriously, dude?

Wow... you morons just spent like 4 pages arguing over whether or not AOC is intelligent?

Her intelligence is irrelevant. Her alma mater is irrelevant. She and the rest of 'The Squad' are unpopular, the "Green New Deal" is a joke, and these ladies will likely be voted out in 2020.

That's all you need to know. Stop wasting time bickering like children over things that have no relevance.

University System wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

okay here is another rankings system - UT is 22 in the nation and 31 IN THE WORLD. Nothing wrong with me. UT Austin a very great university. Second richest (or maybe third) university in the country.

Foolish Sally. UT is a system if NINE schools. Dived by NINE before comparing them to other singular schools.

https://thebestschools.org/features/richest-universities-endowments-generosity-research/

You are correct. 9 schools make up it.

University System wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

okay here is another rankings system - UT is 22 in the nation and 31 IN THE WORLD. Nothing wrong with me. UT Austin a very great university. Second richest (or maybe third) university in the country.

Foolish Sally. UT is a system if NINE schools. Dived by NINE before comparing them to other singular schools.

https://thebestschools.org/features/richest-universities-endowments-generosity-research/

An interesting list.

7 of the top 10 on the list have an average salary of full professor of > $200k.

The lowest paying school is UT Austin with an average full professor salary of $116K.

The next lowest paying school is Texas A&M--College Station (one of the 11 Texas A&M schools) with an average full professor salary of $140K.

What is up with that? Two Texas schools with some of the largest endowments in the U.S. cannot draw the top professors. That is just plain sad. The money must be going to men's sports programs.

Sally Vix wrote:

P wrote:

Well, yeah . . . except for that part about anyone being in favor of denying medical aid to a viable baby. Minor point, I know.

Do you ever not lie? Ever?

Here is Dems in Congress blocking a bill in Congress to mandate that care be given to a baby born alive from an abortion. Do you Barbarians NEVER not lie?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-to-vote-on-born-alive-bill-to-p

Ummm . . . it is already illegal to deny medical care to a viable baby. The bill you reference is for once purpose and one purpose only - to reel in useful idiots like yourself.

So, ok, perhaps I was a bit harsh earlier. Perhaps you were not lying. Perhaps you are simply a moron who has no idea that she is playing the part of the useful idiot to perfection.

Thanks for confirming that I was 100% correct. There is no more certain validation of being correct than that Flagpole takes the opposite position.

Thanks!

agip wrote:

Pence? wrote:

You're on a roll with misinformation today.

1) You don't have to vote for just the Republican or Democratic Party.

2) Although your 90% white Repub party is nearly correct, it is misleading. Overall, 35% of white registered voters identify as independent, while about as many (36%) identify as Republican and fewer (26%) identify as Democratic. (Pew)

I can't be here all day correcting you, so please make sure what you present is factual correct or not intentionally misleading.

Thanks

both my statements are correct.

90% or more of the R party is white

and I feel our 'job' is to vote for one of two parties.

I never said we 'had' to vote red or blue. I said it was our job.

People shirk jobs all the time and go do lazy ash stuff. They go to a movie. They vote libertarian. Both are avoiding their jobs.

Source?

What % of Dem Party is white?

low paid university professor in Texas wrote:

University System wrote:

Foolish Sally. UT is a system if NINE schools. Dived by NINE before comparing them to other singular schools.

https://thebestschools.org/features/richest-universities-endowments-generosity-research/

An interesting list.

7 of the top 10 on the list have an average salary of full professor of > $200k.

The lowest paying school is UT Austin with an average full professor salary of $116K.

The next lowest paying school is Texas A&M--College Station (one of the 11 Texas A&M schools) with an average full professor salary of $140K.

What is up with that? Two Texas schools with some of the largest endowments in the U.S. cannot draw the top professors. That is just plain sad. The money must be going to men's sports programs.

No, the money is NOT going to the men's sports programs. UT Austin and A & M have the two most profitable athletic programs in the country.

I think I copied the wrong thing. The 2 most profitable athletic programs in the country are the Aggies and the Longhorns.

https://www.businessinsider.com/schools-most-revenue-college-sports-2016-10#3-ohio-state--1672-million-23

Gordon Frank wrote:

agip wrote:

isn't the average GPA at elite schools up around 3.5 now? I think grade inflation has made grades pretty silly. Esp when everyone knows STEM grades are harder to get than humanities grades.

Grade inflation or grade deflation is specific to each individual university. Boston University has felt the stigma of grade deflation, not grade inflation for years. Currently the average GPA for a BU graduate is 3.04.

AOC is without question a smart person. Boston University doesn't admit people who aren't, unless they are there for athletics, then there is some leeway. The mere fact she is a BU graduate puts her into an upper echelon group. That she was in the top about 25% of her class minimum makes her stand out even more. Yes there are lots of smarter people out there, but she's no dumb dumb.

You obviously didn't read the Green New Deal.

Roe-v-Wade wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

YOu will say Fox News on the last one but here is PBS ...

pbs org/newshour/politics/democrats-block-senate-gop-bill-on-infants-surviving-abortions

Keyword. GOP Bill. -- A Republican bill that would have threatened prison for doctors who don’t try saving the life of infants born alive during abortions.

Now maybe if Sally volunteered to take in all of those infants, then she an her GOP clown show might be on to something. But, no; the bill provided absolutely $0 for the care of such infants, and $0 for helping with adoption.

FYI: The GOP knew it was a dead duck bill, and loaded with zero dollars to force their own bill to fail.

Sorry, but yours appears to be a sick, demented mind set.

1) The wonderfulness of Sally has nothing whatsoever to do with the rightness of the bill in question.

2) Suggesting that we should not provide medical care for viable babies unless we first allocate money for their long term care is sick beyond belief.

Sorry, but your post can not be looked at any other way than as a combination of stupidity and sickness.

Gordon Frank wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

UT Austin.

Well, I goaded you into that. Top 50 in the world!? Hilarious assertion!

US News and World Report ranks it as the 49th best "National University." That list doesn't even come close to listing all the great liberal arts colleges in the United States that they don't consider "National Universities" that are so much better that UT at Austin; schools like Williams and Vassar and Davidson and the colleges in Claremont, CA and on and on. So, not top 50 in the United States, let alone the world. You do know that there are scores of great colleges outside of the United States, right? Ones that are much better than UT at Austin, right? FYI, Boston University is ranked higher.

Farrah Fawcett and Matthew McConaughey went to UT at Austin. Mental giants to be sure.

No offense to all of you college ranking morons. But "best" is purely subjective. One can define any criteria that one wishes and come up with entirely different rankings.