The issues with DU participation IMHO, are a conflict between two thoughts on how to advance Liberal

[1StrongBlackMan]

231. No, first ...

First, you attempted to claim liberals were lying about voting.

I accepted liberals at their word (i.e., the posts indicating that they would not vote).

When that didn't pan out, you tried selective editing, a al James O' Keefe. That didn't work out for you either.

Yes ... I pulled one line that indicated that fewer liberals can out to vote in 2014 (than in 2008) to refute your claim that liberals did not stay home in 2014. (That is a fact)

I, also, indicated that I was reluctant to use the data point, because the overall data is flawed for drawing comparative conclusions ... and I stated why. The fact that you don't understand the why (but continue attempting to argue) is not my problem.

The fact that the numbers for all demographics dropped, does not negate the fact that fewer liberals did, in fact, go to the polls (compared to 2008) ... You are attempting to argue, "It didn't rain in neighborhood "A" because it rained in every neighborhood in the town ... (and you wish to lecture me on "logic"? ... Please!)

So lastly you make a vague claim of authority, and claim the data must be wrong because you hilariously claim to have taken a statistics class, all without showing the data is wrong, of course. It just must be, because you don't like the results, an you know, because you are hilariously an expert. Argumentum ab auctoritate.

No ... My claim was not that the data was wrong because I have taken a Stats class ... I do, however, stand on the proposition that I was able to RECOGNIZE that the data set does not allow for any meaningful comparative conclusions (and told you why) BECAUSE, in taking the Stats course(s), I know the "rules" of (valid) data analysis.

Sometimes appealing to superior knowledge is just that. The fact, that you don't know what you don't know doesn't make my appellation a flaw in logical, nor does it render the argument false.

An honest operator, of at least one interested in the truth, looks at the available facts and draws a conclusion. You have no such interest in being honest or truthful. You do, however, seem to have a vested interest in perpetuating a lie.

LOL ... You have pointed to EXACTLY the problem in this discussion ... "Garbage in/Garbage out ... Flawed methodologies make for flawed conclusions ... when someone is numerically illiterate, i.e., does not understand data analysis, they accept/arrive at conclusions that are unsupported by from the facts. This is the case here.

And Jesus Christ, they don't teach Logic in English class!

LOL ... I know! Perhaps you should hurry on to your English class because you clearly are not up to the Logics Course work.