Does education mitigate untrustworthy "emotions"?

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Doubtful as liberals use the education system to tout their point of view.

What???? Your "conclusion' is that ...liberals use the education system to tout their point of view.....and you see THAT as something bad?

Considering you're backing a criminal with no qualifications or prior accomplishments for the job she's applying for, who either through carelessness, stupidity, intention, or incompetence broke nine+ laws and got several Americans killed, and seem to lack self awareness for this fact, yes, it's looking like a bad thing.

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

 

[nat4900]

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

Likewise (or conversely) any decent democrat candidate would have "smoked" Trump to the heap of comedic history.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Many, many polls clearly show that Trump support is mostly from non-college educated, white, blue-collar Americans.

Besides rhetoric such as "..trust me, I'm the only one who can bring your jobs back".....and, "I will build a beautiful wall and hire thousands of unemployed Americans", Trump has offered very little specifics as to what his job growth policies would be. ....So, one would conclude, non-college educated, blue collar workers are backing trump more on "emotion" than cognitive reasoning.

Bottom line then, is this: Does higher education curtail our emotional backing of Trump's rhetoric? Or should we conclude that indeed the best personal compass of who to cast one's vote for may ultimately be our emotions?

I don't know about that. We didn't see many emotional Trump supporters attacking people and disrupting Hillary rallies. Didn't see many Trump supporters protesting her at the convention. If they were, they must have been very quiet about it. Seems the only protestors out of control were the Sander's people.

College doesn't equate smarts. College equates education. I remember telling my nephew before he went to college "The human brain is only so large and can hold only so much information. If you push it too hard, something else has got to go, and many times for college people, it's common sense."

A few times those college commie professors got to him about politics, and I straightened him right out. My nephew is one of those people blessed with both, common sense and education. You can't teach logic in college. You either have it or you don't.

Logic: the leftists are trying to demean Trump by saying his supporters are not college educated, just hard working people. Democrats on the other hand have nearly all the poor areas sewed up like the inner-cities, some of which didn't have one Romney vote last election. Who has the better quality of supporters?

 

[saveliberty]

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

Likewise (or conversely) any decent democrat candidate would have "smoked" Trump to the heap of comedic history.

So...perhaps you care to elaborate what was wrong with Bernie.

 

[JoeMoma]

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

Likewise (or conversely) any decent democrat candidate would have "smoked" Trump to the heap of comedic history.

But the democrats had to run a vagina this election cycle. They had the nomination rigged for Hillary, that's why no competent (decent) democrats ran against her.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

Likewise (or conversely) any decent democrat candidate would have "smoked" Trump to the heap of comedic history.

So...perhaps you care to elaborate what was wrong with Bernie.

Polling showed Bernie doing way better than Clinton against all the Republican nominees. I think at the end of the day, however, when people really got a grasp of what all of his promises would have cost us financially he would have sunk, but enough to lose to Trump? Who's to say.

The DNC mainly feared Bernie because he would have shaken up the status quo in D.C. that they and many of their financial backers thrive on. They weren't afraid he'd lose; they were afraid he'd win.

 

[nat4900]

So...perhaps you care to elaborate what was wrong with Bernie.

Nothing.....he got MY vote during the primaries in my state. Go fishing somewhere else.

 

[saveliberty]

So...perhaps you care to elaborate what was wrong with Bernie.

Nothing.....he got MY vote during the primaries in my state. Go fishing somewhere else.

So...you said and I quote, "Likewise (or conversely) any decent democrat candidate would have "smoked" Trump to the heap of comedic history." Why infer there was no other decent candidate?

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Doubtful as liberals use the education system to tout their point of view.

What???? Your "conclusion' is that ...liberals use the education system to tout their point of view.....and you see THAT as something bad?

Considering you're backing a criminal with no qualifications or prior accomplishments for the job she's applying for, who either through carelessness, stupidity, intention, or incompetence broke nine+ laws and got several Americans killed, and seem to lack self awareness for this fact, yes, it's looking like a bad thing.

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

First, she has no qualifications, during her time in any of the positions she held she accomplished absolutely nothing, not one single thing.

You can thank Democrats for Trump, the open polls allowed Democrats to vote for their candidate, then him, completely legally. Democrats gave us Trump, you guys have yourselves to thank.

 

[nat4900]

that's why no competent (decent) democrats ran against her.

So, Lincoln Chafee, Martin O'Malley, Bernie Sanders and Jim Webb were not decent or competent???

 

[nat4900]

So...you said and I quote, "Likewise (or conversely) any decent democrat candidate would have "smoked" Trump to the heap of comedic history." Why did you go with second place?

My vote for Sanders was a PROTEST vote against Clinton....I don't like her all that much.....but, in comparison to the egotistical clown, she's got my vote next Nov..

Again, go fishing somewhere else for your bitching sessions or go take a nap.

 

[saveliberty]

that's why no competent (decent) democrats ran against her.

So, Lincoln Chafee, Martin O'Malley, Bernie Sanders and Jim Webb were not decent or competent???

You are the one who implied there were no decent Democrats. Thanks for the back track.

 

[JoeMoma]

Doubtful as liberals use the education system to tout their point of view.

What???? Your "conclusion' is that ...liberals use the education system to tout their point of view.....and you see THAT as something bad?

Considering you're backing a criminal with no qualifications or prior accomplishments for the job she's applying for, who either through carelessness, stupidity, intention, or incompetence broke nine+ laws and got several Americans killed, and seem to lack self awareness for this fact, yes, it's looking like a bad thing.

It's inaccurate to say Clinton has no qualifications. Resume wise, she's very qualified for the presidency. The problem is she is dishonest, untrustworthy, corrupt, and will maintain the status quo in Washington.

It's unfortunate that the Republicans had to back a dipshit like Trump because anybody else would be smoking her right now.

First, she has no qualifications, during her time in any of the positions she held she accomplished absolutely nothing, not one single thing.

You can thank Democrats for Trump, the open polls allowed Democrats to vote for their candidate, then him, completely legally. Democrats gave us Trump, you guys have yourselves to thank.

In my state which has open primaries, people are only allowed to vote in one. If they vote in the Democrat primary then they do not get to vote in the republican primary.

 

[nat4900]

In my state which has open primaries, people are only allowed to vote in one. If they vote in the Democrat primary then they do not get to vote in the republican primary.

Actually, I think that such is the rule in ALL states.....Otherwise one person would be voting twice.

 

[JoeMoma]

that's why no competent (decent) democrats ran against her.

So, Lincoln Chafee, Martin O'Malley, Bernie Sanders and Jim Webb were not decent or competent???

Bernie was not a true democrat, so he did not get the memo that a vagina had to win. The other three were token penis candidates that dropped out very early.

 

[JoeMoma]

In my state which has open primaries, people are only allowed to vote in one. If they vote in the Democrat primary then they do not get to vote in the republican primary.

Actually, I think that such is the rule in ALL states.....Otherwise one person would be voting twice.

Yes; I agree, but since I had not researched all states I hedged my information to a known fact.

 

[yiostheoy]

Many, many polls clearly show that Trump support is mostly from non-college educated, white, blue-collar Americans.

Besides rhetoric such as "..trust me, I'm the only one who can bring your jobs back".....and, "I will build a beautiful wall and hire thousands of unemployed Americans", Trump has offered very little specifics as to what his job growth policies would be. ....So, one would conclude, non-college educated, blue collar workers are backing trump more on "emotion" than cognitive reasoning.

Bottom line then, is this: Does higher education curtail our emotional backing of Trump's rhetoric? Or should we conclude that indeed the best personal compass of who to cast one's vote for may ultimately be our emotions?

Trump has his tv audience, which is mostly non college educated. Trump has little else not even his own party diehards at the top.

Hillary has most of the females from both parties.

Hillary probably does not need them but she also has the NAACP, Latinos, Muslims, Asians, LGBT, handicapped, Catholic (due to the Pope's comment), etc.

Go figure.

 

[Unkotare]

Seems like someone missed all the emoting and idiocy at the dnc convention.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Considering you're backing a criminal with no qualifications or prior accomplishments for the job she's applying for, who either through carelessness, stupidity, intention, or incompetence broke nine+ laws and got several Americans killed, and seem to lack self awareness for this fact, yes, it's looking like a bad thing.

...and FOX news will be back after these commercials.

Considering you're backing a criminal with no qualifications or prior accomplishments for the job she's applying for, who either through carelessness, stupidity, intention, or incompetence broke nine+ laws and got several Americans killed, and seem to lack self awareness for this fact, yes, it's looking like a bad thing.

...and FOX news will be back after these commercials.

Talking points brought to you by Nancy Pelosi and the DNC.

And now a word from our sponsor, Kimberly-Clark.

Depends. Incontinence protection for Progressive Marxist bedwetters. Designed for your Sun Yat-sen Mao wardrobe.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

You're an amusing little pile of feelings and half-wit Nat, don't ever change.

Just here holding up a mirror to right wingers' faces..Like what you see? LOL

Um. It's facing the wrong way.