ALL DATA SAYS EVERYONE KNOWS ITS COMMON KNOWLEDGE etc, etc.

And yet, no. Nothing is 'confusing'. There just isn't any credible data to support your claim, in the way you seem to think it does.
If there were, you'd be able to 1) provide it and 2) make your case based on it.

Take this for instance. Ecriture presented evidence, and LOLOL is doing his regular schtick.

I however, am an observer. I looked at Ecriture's evidence and it was credible. Regardless of LOLOL's response, I now can look at his response even better and see what kind of a dishonest lowlife he is. Same with anyone else who is observing.

These conversations are not just for the two people involved when discussing in an open forum. It is for passersby and onlookers as well. This is why credible sources that are cited clearly and regularly are so important.

"We have investigated ourselves and found no evidence of wrongdoing..."

Hey master , while you're here what are your thoughts on west virginia? Enquireing minds want to know.

Get used to it.

An official Rite of Passage in this forum is to have Cuepee consistently misrepresent what you actually said.

Yup. The article was posted with Gallup polling that the population gets more liberal as you go from no college to graduate degrees. This is high quality because we can check it vs actual voting results for districts. There are districts where graduate degrees are very common and others where they are unheard of. The actual voting results back up the polls solidifying the original claim, which honestly anyone should be aware of going in to the conversation.

This was actually acknowledged temporarily, but with the post hoc data free fine tuning that somehow education is all liberal indoctrination and gender studies majors dominate the averages. Basically a parroted 0 evidence talking point your typical Foxnews viewer is indoctrinated with. The problem is graduate degree holders skew very heavily against that kind of stuff and towards business, medicine, law and technical fields. So it’s easy to see the claim about technically trained people, from a guy who has shown limited ability to grasp something not even very technical and which no actual data was provided, is certainly false.

http://verdantlabs.com/politics_of_p...ons/index.html

Those stats would hardly be a shocker to anyone who's worked in a technical field, set foot in a college campus or just analyzed voting tends over the last 20 years.

Those stats hold that "Engineering" is (about) "7X% Democrat" ... yet when broken down by engineers, 9 of the 10 engineering types are over 2X% Democrat and in some cases, WAY over?
That's odd.

The volume of blue software engineers skewing the stats must be HUGE in their sample. Huge, I say! HUGE!

https://imgur.com/fSGVoHt

They are just reporting campaign contributing data - there's no sampling involved that could be skewed. Also software engineering / development isn't really comparable in scope to a single engineering field and I suspect there are more software engineers/developers in the US than all the rest of engineers put together.

And if you look at everything else, it's fairly obvious that fields that require high levels of education or intelligence tend to be dominated by liberals. Kamil Galeev here does a great job of explaining Russian economy:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...442896388.html

He talks about how the simplest industries to run closer to power in Russia:



This kind of explains the liberal-conservative divide as well - the simplest industries that haven't changed in decades tend to be dominated by conservatives, while the industries that are undergoing constant changes and need a lot of brain power to keep up tend to be dominated by the liberals. Now there are a lot of exceptions, but that's the general trend.

Yeah, and you don't really need a specific degree to end up being a software engineer. 10 years after college it was probably the most common job among math majors who didn't go to grad school among my friends.I don't think civil engineering works the same way.

The liberal skew is even more striking if you compare to baseline expectations ignoring education. It's a heavily male, likely older given it's people who contribute to a campaign, probably slightly more white and median income somewhere in the 150-3000k range. But not for education, it's a group republicans would expect to win handily.