US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They've already been shouting "We're not gonna take it anymore" after not being able to lurk in the women's bathrooms, so they're already half the way there.
In this case, what troons actually mean is that they're "not gonna take it anymore (up the ass)" with dragon dildos. No guarantee they won't cease the practice altogether; ideally, they should stick to taking it only with power drills from here on out.
 
Subject did not manage to verbalize a single line of the text in the allotted time period.

Students read each sentence out loud and then interpreted the meaning in their own words

they are asked to read and then paraphrase

Because we wanted to see how well students could read a complex text on their own, we told the facilitators not to help the subjects interpret the text. Instead, facilitators were there to record how subjects were understanding the material and to stop them every few sentences to request an interpretation.

additionally

Each taped reading test began with a brief questionnaire in which subjects were asked to give authors and titles of specific nineteenth-century American and British literary works and to explain briefly what they knew about nineteenth-century American and British history and culture. The purpose of these questions was to see how much literary and/or cultural knowledge the subjects possessed. According to Wolfgang Iser in The Act of Reading, one’s ability to read complex literature is partly dependent on one’s knowledge of what he calls the “repertoire” of the text, “the form of references to earlier works, or to social and historical norms, or to the whole culture from which the text has emerged” (69). With Bleak House, this knowledge is crucial.

The results from the questionnaire revealed that most of these subjects could not rely on previous knowledge to help them with Bleak House; in fact, they could not remember much of what they had studied in previous or current English classes. When we asked our subjects to name British and American authors and/or works of the nineteenth-century, 48 percent of those from KRU2 and 52 percent of those from KRU1 could recall at most only one author or title on their own. The majority also could not [End Page 4] access any detail on the information they recalled; they could mention the Industrial Revolution, for example, but could not define what it was. These results suggest that the majority of the subjects in our study were not transferring the literary texts or information from previous classes into their long-term memories.
 
From a random Facebook post:

1748185850872.webp

A brief rundown, Harvard University is one of THE prestigious Ivy League schools in the country. And here's a brief list of US government officials that attended Harvard. If you care, Harvard was known to be home for the Boston Elite's education. Bankers, politicians, business owners. Interesting.

I'm pressing X to Doubt that Harvard is considered an "underdog" in this fight.
 
I live in possibly the worst state for gun control, so all I can do is cry. My AG-turned Governor literally makes it up as she goes along and no one sues.
God that sucks. Where I’m at, the only law on the book still that isn’t federal is you can’t shoot a deer with a machine gun.
 
autistic sperging
You're completely ignoring the fact that:
they absolutely should not be having reactions where they think the section about 'big whiskers' is referring to a fucking cat, or that Dickens was describing ambulatory fossils slouching uphill like some necromancer was at work.
which is not excused by time pressure or having to verbalize the work they've been given.

The only logical conclusion is you had difficulty parsing it yourself and are insecure about people viewing difficulty in reading materials that used to be given out as junior-level high school reading assignments, as a form of illiteracy. I can think of no other reason for you being so personally invested - and assblasted - about this topic.

It's fine if you're not an English major. A person studying to be an English major having such reactions to a section from a Dickensian work, however, isn't and is well below what I or any rational person would expect from someone who has spent two years in college studying the written word. Your hysterics won't change that.
 
From a random Facebook post:

View attachment 7409495

A brief rundown, Harvard University is one of THE prestigious Ivy League schools in the country. And here's a brief list of US government officials that attended Harvard. If you care, Harvard was known to be home for the Boston Elite's education. Bankers, politicians, business owners. Interesting.

I'm pressing X to Doubt that Harvard is considered an "underdog" in this fight.
So basically they're initiating entire college courses on why they're a bunch of sore losers
 
You're completely ignoring the fact that:

which is not excused by time pressure or having to verbalize the work they've been given.

The only logical conclusion is you had difficulty parsing it yourself and are insecure about people viewing difficulty in reading materials that used to be given out as junior-level high school reading assignments, as illiteracy. I can think of no other reason for you being so personally invested - and assblasted - about this topic.
Addendum: Subject loitered outside of test area hurling insults at test giver and insisting he could in fact pass the test and was smarter than all the people who did better than him on it.
 
So basically they're initiating entire college courses on why they're a bunch of sore losers
To their credit, I was able to look up free courses from Harvard's website. Searching "constitution" netted me three free results.

Free college courses...for actual college credit? Or just free information which you can already get from a million other sources?
CREDIT
Audit for Free
Add a Verified Certificate for $149
 
It doesn't even make sense in this context. What does -making sure a foreigner is sent back to their country- even have to do with being a virgin?

So -making sure justice is upheld- is now on the same category as being an incel? That's on the same level of retardation as -being successful in life- being a white supremacist only thing
It's like an animal hissing at a predator, it's a desperate last move to try and look like you're unbothered when you are, in fact, quite bothered.
 
Counter opinion. The U.S constitution is incredibly clear cut and is deliberately written in extremely simplistic retard language so that even 250 years later it could be understood clearly.

People aren't misinterpreting it they're pretending they don't understand what "shall not be infringed" means.
Correct. It was made with normal people in mind, not jews.
 
Are we sure this is a humanity problem and not just a standard 'Burger education is woefully inadequate' problem? Because I'm English and I could understand that passage perfectly well. I think a lot of English people could understand that passage perfectly well. I suppose I might be generous and say the problem is that American English and British English have evolved so separately that older examples of British English are incomprehensible to younger Americans, but there's no way I see only 15% of British readers being functionally incapable of understanding that passage.
If you can parse enough to talk back and forth about geopolitics even as shit posts you're likely not typical of younger university demographics to be fair.
I appreciate the spirit of the faith in your fellow countrymen, but it's not that much better between the two.

To the UK's credit I imagine the figures are skewed heavily by the obvious factor of migrants, and ours dinged with the usual suspects.

https://theweek.com/culture-life/books/the-uks-growing-adult-literacy-problem
https://www.oecd.org/en/publication...s_ab4f6b8c-en/united-kingdom_02bc78e4-en.html

USA.webp
UK.webp

The big comparative charts from the second link look encouraging at a glance- beating the US by a decent margin, But the part that bothers me is we've still both got a pretty fucking large population that is still level 2 and lower.
A not insignificant amount of the first world in the modern day still gets completely filtered by basic metaphor, inference and thematic connection.

This and other cases like the "Assume the other person's IQ" experiments where the smug liberal woman got absolutely decimated by their assumption VS reality made me wonder just how much we collectively assume that other people can understand the things we say and the things they themselves experience at the lowest level.
Because it would explain a whole fucking lot when it comes to the endless treadmills of bullshit in the political landscape.

"Did you hear that [person] is [bad man]?"
"Here's a list of things to prove that's not true."
"None of this proves it."
"But it's right there. In detail."
"[person] is [bad man] because [person] that is [good man] told me."



I'm gonna cool the autism and not spam anymore stats on my end, I just wanted to give a fair shake as you raised a good point.
That and the whole thing is bringing me down the more I look at em. (:_(
 
Last edited:
God that sucks. Where I’m at, the only law on the book still that isn’t federal is you can’t shoot a deer with a machine gun.
>state law bans AR-15s by name in the 90's
>people start buying clones
>no mass shootings, no crimes committed with them, no violation of the law taking place, absolutely no issue
>new AG buttmad that a law she had absolutely nothing to do with and did absolutely nothing to reduce gun crime (handguns are always the problem) wasn't banning the mean evil America gun
>introduces "Interchangeability rule" in mid-2010's that says if your gun is "interchangeable" with an AR-15, it's illegal
>no mention of this anywhere in state law, no legal precedent, bitch just makes it up
>even says "yeah this was the law the whole time so everyone who did this ackshullllyyyy broke the law but I'm such a magnanimous person that I'll grandfather in all the clones teehee"
>no one says anything, local news praises it, partisan legislature claps, partisan judiciary claps, no 2A groups care


jb suicide.webp
 
God that sucks. Where I’m at, the only law on the book still that isn’t federal is you can’t shoot a deer with a machine gun.
Based gun ownership states. The only law on the book for mine is, "If you DO shoot at a deer with a machinegun, just make sure I don't hear it. Or that if I do, you give me the tenderloins."
 
Back