I'm honestly getting sick of how perverse this country's political system has become.
This goes to both parties, and both "liberals" and "conservatives".
No one's practicing politics for the sake of public good - everyone's "politicking".
Whose agendas are the democrats promulgating? Same goes for the GOP.
Everyone's bought out by special interests, and taxpayers are just getting fked left and right.
The Heritage Foundation has been the bastion of the American conservative movement since our founding in 1973.
There's a neutral POV...
David S wrote:
The Heritage Foundation has been the bastion of the American conservative movement since our founding in 1973.
There's a neutral POV...
Looks like honesty to me
But but we help disadvantaged people and disenfranchised people and disabled people and dissidents and only care about their life. No need to vote for us or give our team any money.
dfa wrote:
I'm honestly getting sick of how perverse this country's political system has become.
This goes to both parties, and both "liberals" and "conservatives".
No one's practicing politics for the sake of public good - everyone's "politicking".
Whose agendas are the democrats promulgating? Same goes for the GOP.
Everyone's bought out by special interests, and taxpayers are just getting fked left and right.
The problem is there is no real data to support the hypothesis that a citizenship question will suppress or not suppress response among certain demographic groups. If the ACS sample is too small to conduct a test for specific geographic areas than the test should be conducted in the 2020 decennial.
Without a well-designed test we will never be able to accurately measure the impact of adding the question. This should be an issue of statistical methodology not politics.
Proper methodology would help with the proper use of then vs. than.
David S wrote:
The Heritage Foundation has been the bastion of the American conservative movement since our founding in 1973.
There's a neutral POV...
There's nothing wrong with citing liberal or conservative sources. If you think it's wrong then explain why.
San Francisco Resident wrote:
https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/only-the-us-it-controversial-the-census-ask-about-citizenship?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=thf-fb&fbclid=IwAR0V_3leEHQzcjt2XVOodnFH0RRlmNfrmT_16qaRsuf8rsV_9c99BZdainc
Obviously citing a very right wing point of view.
The righties went nuts a few year back when a Supreme Court Justice talked about looking other countries laws. Now they are embracing it.
It’s a joke. Lets adopt those other countries views on the death penalty while we are at it.
The fact is it racism pure and simple. This is a smokescreen. The righties never cared what other countries did.
Hardloper wrote:
David S wrote:
There's a neutral POV...
There's nothing wrong with citing liberal or conservative sources. If you think it's wrong then explain why.
Sure but it should also be clearly labeled. Like every time the heritage foundations says this tax cut will raise more revenue, they should be required to say that we have been wrong the last 6 times we said this so we are overdue to be right for a change.?
If every other country asked about gun ownership, should we add this to the census? Personally I am a conservative so I hate change. Census has been working fine. Why change now? I know Trump loves idenity politics but aren't there some real issues that need addressing?
Look, it has obvious bias. I'm not opposed to a citizenship question, but it has be done correctly. That "article" uses quote without any references. They don't even say why the question is even needed. Why are we changing something that hasn't been changed for 20 years? Besides more accurate data... Which if people aren't responding truthfully, or respond at all you won't have accurate data anyways. Oh yeah, someone that works at a polling company now states it hasn't made a difference in the accuracy of their polling. No evidence supporting that claim except a quote. How is this more accurate data going to be more useful? He doesn't even explain why those oppose find it unconstitutional. He just says we had some for of citizenship question, but just not on every form therefore asking everyone isn't unconstitutional. Why was this question not asked on every census form before? I have no tacts to support a nefarious motive in adding the question, but if you look at the trouble we are having with immigration and this administration's stance on it, suspicion is warranted.
Ddjddj wrote:
If every other country asked about gun ownership, should we add this to the census?
Logically people would be worried that the government was trying to set up a gun registry. If instead they just asked 1/36 people extrapolated from there, it wouldn't be AS egregious as asking every household. This question doesn't even have to ask if they legally or illegal had a gun, but I doubt people would want to answer that question. If you are a conservative, and can't see why some liberals are upset about this then you are being intentionally obtuse.
Ddjddj wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
There's nothing wrong with citing liberal or conservative sources. If you think it's wrong then explain why.
Sure but it should also be clearly labeled. Like every time the heritage foundations says this tax cut will raise more revenue, they should be required to say that we have been wrong the last 6 times we said this so we are overdue to be right for a change.?
If every other country asked about gun ownership, should we add this to the census? Personally I am a conservative so I hate change. Census has been working fine. Why change now? I know Trump loves idenity politics but aren't there some real issues that need addressing?
Their bias is clearly labeled. You obviously don't have a counterargument. You "hating change" isn't a counterargument.
Bs meter off the chart wrote:
The righties went nuts a few year back when a Supreme Court Justice talked about looking other countries laws. Now they are embracing it.
It’s a joke. Lets adopt those other countries views on the death penalty while we are at it.
The fact is it racism pure and simple. This is a smokescreen. The righties never cared what other countries did.
Survey says....."RACISM"
Sorry, but it's much more complex than that. You are still thinking within the binary box of left vs right that they have set out by design. Do some research and try to keep the left and right bias out of your head, it's only a speed bump to figuring out the real truth. The goal is control of all, not just certain races
Hardloper wrote:
Their bias is clearly labeled. You obviously don't have a counterargument. You "hating change" isn't a counterargument.
It's just not worth my time. Here are some counterarguments:
1. The title of the piece implies that it's not controversial anywhere outside the US. However, the article does not address this at all. Many countries don't ask citizenship questions on their census.
2. The Census Bureau believes that including questions about citizenship on the census form is likely to give a worse accounting for the demographic makeup of the US.
https://www2.census.gov/ces/wp/2018/CES-WP-18-38.pdf3. Quoting from 538.com:
The case before the Supreme Court is about the legality of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census; it has been challenged by an array of states and civil rights organizations. Ross says the question was added in response to a request from the Justice Department for more detailed citizenship data to help enforce the Voting Rights Act, but three lower court judges have all concluded that the evidence shows he had already decided to add the question and used the Justice Department as a pretext. The judges concluded, too, that the administration violated standards of transparency and accountability required of executive agencies by failing to test the question and ignoring expert advice against adding it. Two also ruled that the question would violate the Constitution because it seems likely to result in an undercount.
4. Here's what the court said:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-966/94933/20190401143851826_2019-04-01%200745%20Amicus%20Brief%20for%20Historians%20and%20Social%20Scientists.pdf5. Let's not pretend we're idiots, everyone knows the only reason it's being discussed is to score political points and to find a way to underrepresent Democrats.
Trump's endgame is to use the "anonymous" data—because address are known—to determine where non-citizens live, and then have ICE raid those addresses and deport everyone living there.
5. Let's not pretend we're idiots, everyone knows the only reason it's being discussed is to score political points and to find a way to underrepresent Democrats.
A better question would be to ask why the Democrats rely so heavily on people who are not citizens of this country. Aren't they the same party that is so concerned about "Russian Interference"? Do they not share similar concerns about citizens of other countries living among us and participating directly in our political process?
We have a right to know how many people residing in the country are not citizens and are otherwise unaccounted for.
Democrats and Republicans should be united on this front, at the very least. How can we create informed immigration policies without the ability to collect the most basic data?
This talk of "undercounting" and "civil liberties" is a smokescreen to prevent the government from obtaining accurate data on the people residing in our country. If illegal immigrants are thriving in the U.S. and the communities they are joining are thriving as a result of their arrival, then what do the Democrats have to fear?
Count Me In wrote:
A better question would be to ask why the Democrats rely so heavily on people who are not citizens of this country.
I don’t rely on non-American citizens anymore than you, apart from the vendors that supply my company.
Count Me In wrote:
5. Let's not pretend we're idiots, everyone knows the only reason it's being discussed is to score political points and to find a way to underrepresent Democrats.
A better question would be to ask why the Democrats rely so heavily on people who are not citizens of this country. Aren't they the same party that is so concerned about "Russian Interference"? Do they not share similar concerns about citizens of other countries living among us and participating directly in our political process?
We have a right to know how many people residing in the country are not citizens and are otherwise unaccounted for.
Democrats and Republicans should be united on this front, at the very least. How can we create informed immigration policies without the ability to collect the most basic data?
This talk of "undercounting" and "civil liberties" is a smokescreen to prevent the government from obtaining accurate data on the people residing in our country. If illegal immigrants are thriving in the U.S. and the communities they are joining are thriving as a result of their arrival, then what do the Democrats have to fear?
They don’t. Learn how to read
RIP: D3 All-American Frank Csorba - who ran 13:56 in March - dead
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
Running for Bowerman Track Club used to be cool now its embarrassing
Rest in Peace Adrian Lehmann - 2:11 Swiss marathoner. Dies of heart attack.
Hats off to my dad. He just ran a 1:42 Half Marathon and turns 75 in 2 months!
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year