jerryskids

https://news.northeastern.edu/2024/05/10/israel-hamas-tiktok-research/ Now, if you engage there for long enough, and manage to ferret out the small minority of conservative content, then yes, the algorithm will direct more of that to you. But that does not change my point that TikTok was omitted from the OP poll, and that the vast majority of TikTok users are young, Biden supporters. And I'll add: if you were a conservative with strong political convictions, would you engage long and heavily on political topics within a platform that has minimal such content?

Congrats Cloaca! How do we break the tie for first pick in the Memorial?

Weepaws lives in Nevada with legalized prostitution and basically two casino-driven cities and a bunch of desert... but Arizona is a bad place.

And back to my original post, which you completely avoided with your red herring. Do you disagree with my assertion that if neither parent WANTS to stay home, then that is not a sign of good parenting?

Why would I ask him, you responded to me? But I'll play your little game: show me where he said that staying at home with a bunch of people parenting for you makes one a good parent.

Honest question: can you explain back to me my point? I'm not asking you to agree with it, but rather just to see if you understand it. Because I don't think you do.

Wrong. TikTok is "majoritarian," amplifying what overall users are engaging with. To quote Vox, a Lefty site, regarding pro palestinian vs. Israel content: This is the best case, favorable interpretation, which presumes that China is not pushing a narrative.

Great point. Weepaws wants to leave in place an 1864 law that will rally a bunch of people to put in the amendment I mentioned, then NOT go to vote. That right there is a winning strategy. He might as well abort those babies himself.

You support Arizona putting in its constitution that a woman can abort a baby as it's crowning because of "mental anguish." Congrats on the killing of thousands of human lives. Jesus must be so proud of you.

Wut? Getting help to vacuum the house makes you not a great parent? How did you get this from what I said? I said if neither WANTS to stay home, that's not a sign of great parenting. And to your bright red herring: no, a woman who spends the day having sex with the pool boy while a nanny takes her kid to the park is not a sign of great parenting, either.

Forgot that, good point.

You have a 10 inch shlong, make a million dollars a year, and win all of your fantasy leagues.

I've explained why age is relevant, you are too dense to get it. Here, fine. Social media users by age: https://khoros.com/resources/social-media-demographics-guide Summary: Younger people consume more social media. I've already shown data in an earlier link regarding age vs. candidate support. All of this data is inconsistent with "data" that Biden supporters (who are older) get more info from social media. An adult in a conversation might show why they disagree with my concerns. But not you, BeachBlade. Hmm... yup...

I literally gave you a link with the age data. My new name for you is BeachBlade. Hmm... yup... Also I have 5 US patents. You may have figured out the IRR on an investment once. I wouldn't go down that path. But you will. Hmm... yup...

Ignoring the Cletus of your side on this board, BeachBlade, I think there probably is more support for Trump among people who don't follow politics closely. They aren't told 24/7 by the MSM about the mean OMB guy. I would add the online versions of those Leftist rags to "newspaper." But I still don't think a lot of 23 yr olds are paying for subscriptions and reading them daily.

I questioned the validity of the poll. I explained why. That is what adults do in conversations. You wouldn't know. You replied with a tween-level post about CatPee. I provided a link with multiple polls supporting my age support position. Are you questioning my assertion that TikTok was not included in that poll? And you are questioning this? How is a statement about the lack of TikTok irrelevant to a dispute with a poll which glaringly omits it? I don't know why follow me around spewing diarrhea out of your fingers, but it's not a good look. I suggest you stop. But you won't.

So, nothing about my points. How's your parents' TikTok accounts going? Are they protesting for Hamas? An intelligent poster might have argued that Trump support among young people is increasing: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/07/voter-age-biden-trump-2024-election-00150923Link Then I would counter with yes, increasing, but still a majority for Biden. But you aren't intelligent. You are threatened by the logic of my post, so you deflect with CatPee and similarly idiotic pap.

So we are supposed to believe that younger people, who overwhelmingly support Biden, are cracking open newspapers a watching the evening broadcast news? And older people, who tend to Trump, are all up in YouTube channels? Also, I noticed a glaring omission of TikTok. If you know 20-somethings (I have three of them), this is where they get the bulk of their info. And the platform is a Left-wing echo chamber.

My favorite rivalry was the Four Horsemen vs. ... pretty much everyone else. The most dominant bad guys I can recall seeing.

Our smoker needs the igniter replaced. I got the igniter delivered from RecTeq but I haven't done it. They show a 2 minute sped-up video to make it look easy peasy, but you basically need to take the entire thing apart to do it. I'm askeered a little.

If one of them doesn't WANT to stay home, I'd argue that that isn't a sign of great parenting.

I feel strongly that the case should never have been brought, but in the end that is a matter of opinion. To my knowledge the prosecution has yet to broach the subject of election interference; perhaps the plan is just mention in summary, "well hey, there was an election, so it interfered, yahtzee!" But I have no idea how it is going to turn out. Also, your sad attempt to add "hung jury" to your side of the bet made me think: what if he is found guilty of the misdemeanors only? I feel like I heard there is a scenario where this is an option. If so, I could see this being the plan all along. Tying the docs stuff to a bullshiot election interference charge allowed them to call it a felony and bring the case in the first place. But they never even try to make it stick, and let the jury be Solomon splitting the baby and find for the misdemeanors. In the end, Bragg and the judge can go to their woke get-togethers and be heroes for convicting the OMB. I had another idea, more tinfoil hat, where the judge calls a mistrial at the end because the prosecution never brought the felony part of the case, and they do the whole thing again. Here the idea is simply to keep OMB busy during the election.

So, was he charged with election interference or not?

I think it's interesting that this thread title, and much of the MSM, call this an "Election Interference" trial, yet he hasn't been charged with election interference in NY.

Yes, she says I insulted her. I do not recall it but have apologized as best as I can, given that I don't recall it. Is this what a "sketchy past" means?