• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

There Are No Conservative Cities, Because Conservatives Are Hill People.

Well then I guess the Repubs will have to come up with policies and laws that the majority of Americans can agree with, otherwise the cities will remain firmly under the control of the Dems.
I will add one more thought, in most cities the race for mayor rarely includes Party affiliation, people tend to vote based on policies and not Party.

LOL. It is lefties who are protesting and rioting in cities because lefty policies and laws obviously haven't been working.
 
Righties react at the spur of the moment using the crafted narrative sent down from above. There are no brain cells in propaganda.

lol

Lefties react at the spur of the moment using the crafted narrative sent down from above. There are no brain cells in propaganda.

lol
 
Blaming "Democratic cities" for a variety of things is nice, if it makes your toes squiggle, but there isn't a single conservative city in the country.

Cities frighten conservatives, and that's a good thing, because Democrats don't want conservatives in cities.

Democrats are too busy working in cities. They're producing goods and services that are then traded across the world. They are taxed on their income for the work they do. The federal government then sends these taxes in the form of subsidies out into the hills, trees, and valleys, where conservatives hide from minorities and make furious posts about Democratic cities.

And I for one don't mind helping the hill people, as long as the Democratic cities meme keeps them where they should be.

Perhaps, but another way to look at it is Democrats want people to be reliant on government whereas Republicans are more self-reliant. This may or may not be by design. City folk must rely on government, city government to provide many more services than country folk. There's a lot less rules and regulations when one lives in the country than in the city. It may be just the way things work with folks with different life styles and the way they rely on government to provide certain services.
 
Uh... huh. :shock:

Well, next time, don't hold back and let us know how you really feel.

Site ain’t called “beagrabbed*****.com.” ;)
 
Apparently you haven't been watching the news and I'm not talking about Fox News.

What city do you live in? I’m in the Bay Area. Other than the post-apocalyptic red skies from the lack of raking, ain’t no rioting nor burning nor looting I can report on the ground here.

Where do you live and how bad is it? Do you need help? Are you okay? Why are you scared and how can we help?
 
What city do you live in? I’m in the Bay Area. Other than the post-apocalyptic red skies from the lack of raking, ain’t no rioting nor burning nor looting I can report on the ground here.

Where do you live and how bad is it? Do you need help? Are you okay? Why are you scared and how can we help?

He seems very scared
 
LOL. It is lefties who are protesting and rioting in cities because lefty policies and laws obviously haven't been working.

You have something against people that Protest?
 
He seems very scared

They keep telling us 200k dead from Covid is the calm, cool approach but we need federal shock troops and air strikes because of the same guys they keep calling “soyboys” are throwing bricks through some windows. Or something. STILL no idea what it is they want everyone to be afraid of, and why? If 200k dead from covid is what it is, why should i be moved because a shop keeper gets a few nicks on his face and loses his store? **** him. Life goes on. Learn to code, amirite?
 
They keep telling us 200k dead from Covid is the calm, cool approach but we need federal shock troops and air strikes because of the same guys they keep calling “soyboys” are throwing bricks through some windows. Or something. STILL no idea what it is they want everyone to be afraid of, and why? If 200k dead from covid is what it is, why should i be moved because a shop keeper gets a few nicks on his face and loses his store? **** him. Life goes on. Learn to code, amirite?

My city is an apocalyptic wasteland where we fight the cannibals for resources.


But we have great public transportation
 
Apart from money, I don't see a lot of conserving of anything going on among Conservatives. Just mostly con.
 
Lefties react at the spur of the moment using the crafted narrative sent down from above. There are no brain cells in propaganda.

lol

They certainly do. There are manufactured narratives and scripts from both sides. Trumpeteers and Cultists happens to employ this far more heavily than before, but it's not just something that the right does.

And there are no brain cells in propaganda. Which is the point. Left...right...neither side is thinking, just reacting.
 
They certainly do. There are manufactured narratives and scripts from both sides. And there are no brain cells in propaganda. Which is the point. Left...right...neither side is thinking, just reacting.

I fixed your post for you.

Likes post
 
Yes. Isnt that a good thing? People wanting to improve their government?

It shows that they aren't happy with lefty policies and lefty laws because they are failing. If only the lefties could see the forest through the trees.
 
Site ain’t called “beagrabbed*****.com.” ;)
I'm just an opioid-addled country bumpkin from a rural locale in Canada, but it seems to me that the opioid crisis is a pretty mixed bag, not a red-state or blue-state phenomenon.

Also, I know we country mice don't produce anything and aren't taxed on our income, but please consider this analysis re urban vs. rural crime rates:

In order to examine the current relationship between population size and crime rates, Table 1 provides data on arrest rates per 100,000 population in 1996 for cities grouped according to their size, for a number of offenses. Murder rates are highest in cities with populations greater than 250,000 and decline for each decreasing city-size category, to a low of 3.0 per 100,000 for cities under 10,000. A similar pattern is seen for robbery, where arrest rates are over six times higher in the largest, as opposed to the smallest, cities. However, there are no clear differences in arrest rates across city size categories for the crime of larceny-theft. Although rural-urban distinctions based exclusively on size of place are not ideal, this pattern of a strong relationship between city size and violent crime rates and weaker relationships for property crimes generally holds for several different societies and in several different historical periods (Sacco et al.).

Similar relationships have been revealed in studies using victimization data. For example, Bachman analyzed data from the National Crime Victimization Survey for the years 1973 to 1990, and found generally that individuals living in central cities had the highest rates of criminal victimization for all types of crime, while those living in nonmetropolitan (rural) areas had the lowest rates. More specifically, on average, individuals residing in central areas experienced nearly twice as many crimes of violence as those living in nonmetropolitan areas, although Bachman noted that the gap in violent crime victimization had been decreasing over the 1973–1990 period.

The notable exception to the pattern of higher crime rates in urban as opposed to rural jurisdictions revealed in Table 1 is for the offense of driving under the influence of alcohol. For this offense, rates were lowest in cities with populations greater than 250,000, increasing to a rate of 833.4 per 100,000 in cities of less than 10,000. These differences are at least partially explained by the fact that alcohol use, particularly among young people, is more frequent in rural areas. This may pose a particular problem for rural dwellers who have to spend far more time on the road, traveling longer distances.​

Looking at the statistics, rural and urban America are otherwise pretty comparable. Rural America is slightly poorer, slightly more disabled, slightly more entrepreneurial, and has a slightly higher business survival rate. No reason for neighbours and fellow countrymen to hate on each other.
 
It shows that they aren't happy with lefty policies and lefty laws because they are failing. If only the lefties could see the forest through the trees.

So you think cities will all turn Republican now????



Dude you are really freaking hilarious
 
I fixed your post for you.

Likes post

Yeah, it doesn't really matter that much. The non-thinking and reactionary tendencies of the Republocrats is really what's putting us in a whole. I don't understand how a thinking person could like, endorse, or defend Trump. I don't see how a thinking person would back Biden. These are all just reactions to other reactions and each iteration of reaction gets worse, we just dig ourselves deeper into a hole.

It's time to put down the shovel. We're deep enough.
 
They certainly do. There are manufactured narratives and scripts from both sides. Trumpeteers and Cultists happens to employ this far more heavily than before, but it's not just something that the right does.

And there are no brain cells in propaganda. Which is the point. Left...right...neither side is thinking, just reacting.

You seem to have your own biases against capitalism. Are you a cultist?
 
I'm just an opioid-addled country bumpkin from a rural locale in Canada, but it seems to me that the opioid crisis is a pretty mixed bag, not a red-state or blue-state phenomenon.

Also, I know we country mice don't produce anything and aren't taxed on our income, but please consider this analysis re urban vs. rural crime rates:

In order to examine the current relationship between population size and crime rates, Table 1 provides data on arrest rates per 100,000 population in 1996 for cities grouped according to their size, for a number of offenses. Murder rates are highest in cities with populations greater than 250,000 and decline for each decreasing city-size category, to a low of 3.0 per 100,000 for cities under 10,000. A similar pattern is seen for robbery, where arrest rates are over six times higher in the largest, as opposed to the smallest, cities. However, there are no clear differences in arrest rates across city size categories for the crime of larceny-theft. Although rural-urban distinctions based exclusively on size of place are not ideal, this pattern of a strong relationship between city size and violent crime rates and weaker relationships for property crimes generally holds for several different societies and in several different historical periods (Sacco et al.).

Similar relationships have been revealed in studies using victimization data. For example, Bachman analyzed data from the National Crime Victimization Survey for the years 1973 to 1990, and found generally that individuals living in central cities had the highest rates of criminal victimization for all types of crime, while those living in nonmetropolitan (rural) areas had the lowest rates. More specifically, on average, individuals residing in central areas experienced nearly twice as many crimes of violence as those living in nonmetropolitan areas, although Bachman noted that the gap in violent crime victimization had been decreasing over the 1973–1990 period.

The notable exception to the pattern of higher crime rates in urban as opposed to rural jurisdictions revealed in Table 1 is for the offense of driving under the influence of alcohol. For this offense, rates were lowest in cities with populations greater than 250,000, increasing to a rate of 833.4 per 100,000 in cities of less than 10,000. These differences are at least partially explained by the fact that alcohol use, particularly among young people, is more frequent in rural areas. This may pose a particular problem for rural dwellers who have to spend far more time on the road, traveling longer distances.​

Looking at the statistics, rural and urban America are otherwise pretty comparable. Rural America is slightly poorer, slightly more disabled, slightly more entrepreneurial, and has a slightly higher business survival rate. No reason for neighbours and fellow countrymen to hate on each other.

Stopped after the word “Canada.” Not a single **** could be given about your opinion on American cities.

I won’t apologize but I will tell you I look forward to your contributions and our exchanges in other threads! :)
 
Yep. Only Democrats live in cities. And only city folk produce goods and services and are taxed on their income.

Republicans live in cities, and produce goods and services and are taxed. But it's not too inaccurate to say that only DEMOCRATIC cities do it well enough that they pay more in taxes than they take, while Republican cities are subsidized by the Democratic cities, taking more tax dollars than they contribute. New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco FUND the nation, while Mont
 
So you think cities will all turn Republican now????



Dude you are really freaking hilarious

I doubt it. They're too stupid to figure it out. When the left aren't happy with the left policies and laws and protest and riot about it, it doesn't even occur to them what the solution is. It is the left's trademark to double down on the very things that didn't work as if they didn't work because they didn't do enough of it. Their solution for things that don't work is to do more of what doesn't work.
 
Yeah, it doesn't really matter that much. The non-thinking and reactionary tendencies of the Republocrats is really what's putting us in a whole. I don't understand how a thinking person could like, endorse, or defend Trump. I don't see how a thinking person would back Biden. These are all just reactions to other reactions and each iteration of reaction gets worse, we just dig ourselves deeper into a hole.

It's time to put down the shovel. We're deep enough.

I don't think or endorse any or all of Trump's nonsense. But, I certainly do not endorse Democratic policies. I look past Trump's warts and stupidness to realize that the right's policy ideas are better than the left's policy ideas. That's it in a nutshell. And, I'm not going to listen to any of the left's stupid TDSness in their total and complete anti-Trump obsession, which is ten times worse than the right did under Obama.
 
Back
Top Bottom