The available data suggests that the "you become more conservative as you get older" idea is probably false (or at least incomplete) as a general rule, but just happens to predict partisan affiliation by age in the recent past.

Was it Becky69 in your Haight-Ashbury days?

There was an article that I can't find that drew a link between who was President when you were a young adult and your party support. The lot that are in their 50s came of age when Reagan was President and of course he was incredibly popular. So they were more likely to lean conservative in elections.

I really wish I knew where the article was. I remember posting it a few times on here in the past.

Well no. He had conservative views going all the way back like his views on the military. And even today he says things like healthcare for all which makes him a commie.

But either way that is an old bit. Meh... I went from more conservative to less.


Plus you miss my point. Supporting a draft dodger is now a republican conservative position.

The article I linked is referencing the same research. There's another article about it here, with some other links.

Right wing fishing expedition. You are seriously representing that the DOJ investigation was a right wing fishing expedition?

Is there something I don't know? Maybe I am the most ignorant politics poster on this site. If so, I'll take a leave of absence and come back after I do some homework. I straight up don't want to be this ignorant if that's what I am.

I did too. But I'll bet you didn't lose an ounce of respect for Maddow.

This is History From Movies. Devotees of Regular History know that support for the Vietnam war was higher among younger cohorts than among the middle-aged. Hippies and draft dodgers were an extremely small section of the youth demographic. It's just that the crewcut squarejohns don't give the costume designers much to do, basically, so they don't get so many movies made about them.

The whole 'drifting right as you get older' thing is also mostly BS, but I see well named is already on that.

I think you guys are trying to gaslight me. I was never for blackballing Kaepernick. I think his peaceful protest and all his efforts (including the money he donated AFTER he was let go) was extremely commendable. All I did was ask if his refusal to stand for the pledge could/should be construed as unpatriotic. I landed on no because he has every right not to be proud of his country for killing unarmed blacks. There are a great many people who still feel he is being unpatriotic and dissing those who served. This is what I mean. The fact that I eventually found the correct answer isn't what's important to you. You ostracize me for not coming up with it quick enough. This is why I accuse you of not really caring about the actual issue at hand. It's all about the name calling and ostracizing.

As it stands, I'm not sure what to think. I laud him for his ongoing efforts and refusal to back down. But is he being blackballed? We can talk stats if you like. He's gotten progressively worse with each passing year in the league. I can't think of a team outside of the Jets where he could start. And the Jets might be the only team with a justifiable reason NOT to hire him because they're TRYING to tank with McNown.

DOJ and FBI got involved when the committee on Benghazi subpoenaed emails and claimed that classified information may have been compromised. See you after your homework! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill...il_controversy

I don't watch much of Maddow but my read is that she is a solid journalist.

Yes. The link you provided used the article I was referencing

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ml?rref=upshot

Quite possibly, I don't think it's a liberal echo chamber btw.

It would be more worthwhile to explore the topic of people changing their votes (and their beliefs/attitudes although that's a tough topic here). That's a good entry into why people vote the way they do with all it's complexities, and then into political policies and party methods to best take advantage of it.

The democrats and progressive forces do not just have to 'wait for people to die', nor do they have to move towards the center. They can (must in my view) both move left and seek to win over non-democrat voters.

I was just thinking this to myself the other day! Where are these hippies now? How are they putting up with this and not fighting with the young people of today?

I was watching an old video from the 60s and things were far worse than I thought. Police were clubbing people, using water cannons, etc. I didn't realize there was that much violence over the civil rights movement. And maybe that needs to happen again. The final push into the end zone or at least another first down.

Well, this kind of speaks to my point that racism is a learned thing. Fly once chastised me for saying that upbringing has a lot to do with whether or not one holds racist views. But to me, it's a lot like religion. Once indoctrinated, it's hard to break out of unless something causes you to stop and really think hard about it. I'm not speaking of overt racism (although, I don't think people here make any distinctions with respect to racists. You either are, or you aren't). But I contend that many whites simply don't recognize their privilege or the disadvantages others. It's also a class thing. The rich have a harder time understanding the disadvantages of the poor too. Many of those old hippies tripping out at Woodstock, have gone on to become financially successful and forgotten what it's like to be poor.

Do they have any other choice?

I definitely messed up over some posts towards the end. I take full responsibility for that.

That apart, we attempted to allow as much political conversation as possible while not allowing racist/etc posts. Mistakes were made sure (some real and some imagined which will no doubt feature regularly) - it's a tough line to find when people like trump are in power but we did our best. I suggest you ask the other mods of Pv7.0 if you want a fairer view. Well Named isn't afraid to criticise me and may be someone who's views you respect (I do even where we disagree)

btw I didn't perma ban any regular. (A few new accounts got the chop). I didn't see it as a good thing for 2+2 for me to to do that and they are generally allowed back anyway.

There's a dedicated 'Museum' thread here that's probably better if you want to discuss it more.

There are still old sixties hippies around. Sigh.

You allowed literal Neo-Nazi propaganda, banned LG after he dunked on wil, and then lied about why you banned him

Sure. They could have not nominated and elected two draft dodgers as their last presidents.

LOL. TO THE TAPE

"All I did was ask if it was unpatriotic and I decided no" "I commend his peaceful protest" LOL Lestat did you think we can't find P7 posts anymore??? Holy **** what a trainwreck

Not sure if you're familiar with Bill Maher, but he had on Ken Bone the now famous questioner at one of the debates. By every perception imaginable the guy's a thoughtful, intelligent, well informed voter. Maher was incredulous to how he could possibly have been undecided so late in the game when the choices were between Trump and HRC. He identified as a libertarian, but I agree that Dems should be looking to win over people like him

I'm not seeing the contradictions you are. I said I questioned if he was being unpatriotic, which your quotes show. The only thing I'd take back is the comment that he's acting like a spoiled brat or diminishing his 5% donation. I've admitted countless times now that I was wrong on that and I changed my views.

Nevertheless, he DOES have the right to protest, and the owner DOES have the right to kick him off the team for being a distraction. He's a backup quarterback at best. If he were of starting quality, we could be more demanding about why he isn't currently on a team.

If you want to talk gaslighting, here's Lestat in November of last year, all of TWO MONTHS after the above posts

Maybe Lestat just took over his 2p2 account from his "friend"?

Lol "every perception imaginable"

Literally the first post you made with the word "Kaepernick" in it after your trainwreck performance in that P7 thread is the one I posted above where you pretended you were on the right side all along, lol who do you think you're fooling?

Lestat's a shameless hypocrite to a tee.

The gaslighting over written history is just an aside. Kaepernick, by any reasonable definition, was tried by the media just the same as Sterling. Only Sterling's trial deserved scorn.