Ooooh, so you’re an idiot! Jeez, why didn’t you preface with that?

Yes, suddenly the California federal Democrats will become more liberal than other members of the Democratic caucus.

What a cogent response! Next time, why don’t dunk your head in a porto-potty tank and scream, “BOO!” at Bokbunzajoo1 from 1000 yards. Really show them what for.

Hate to body-snark, but why is this fuck so proud of a (political construction loosely centred on a) genetic heritage that gave him WAY TOO FUCKING MUCH area between his nose and upper lip?

Ostrander wept.

Ugh, there is nothing worse than corporate pseudo-b movies, which have a real unctuousness that spoils the delight in playing on film that shines through a lot of the best of real b movies.

A) The word “article” is a catch-all term as well as specific and distinguishes work presented in a journal versus a conference or other academic work. If the article in question (Morgan et al.) were a book review, you could maaaaybe get half points from a super-generous judge.

That type of strategic voting simply does not work without a preexisting and already identified consistent pool of voters demonstrating the ability to swing elections.

You certainly did post a really terrible article! I’m glad to see you tacitly agree with me there by your new “its a review!” spin.

I have a bias against American researchers taking a massively questionable study and taking it to a small and basically unknown journal (impact score of zero). If that doesn’t raise red flags to you, you are a fucking moron.

Nah, you also say pretty dumb things, like the tax deduction thing that you are clearly unwilling to defend OR acknowledge was a pretty big fuck up of a statement.

Well, his grandmother was rich enough to get his dad’s real estate/construction firm off the ground on the cusp of the Depression, so they definitely weren’t paupers.

Except that the actual methodology in that research is really not great (particularly at accurate and consistent exposure), and has been criticised from a number of sources (see Foster and Moulder, 2013, a meta-study of existing research that goes into the methodology problems) which is probably why studies like…

Oh, and two of the authors are anti-cellphone activists. Totally neutral study!

The official journal of the Saudi microscopy society? SUPER RELIABLE JOURNAL!

You are either purposely or through ignorance misrepresenting the peer-reviewed research. You are a moral coward.

Introspect? You are not actually particularly literate in the relevant literature, the conclusions you offer are inane, and your bias here is transparent. Fuck off and die, please.

Well, in that a protest vote is supposed to be a clear and unequivitable expression of one’s ideological position, wasting it on someone who has shitty ideological positions is pretty dumb as wasteful!

Easy answer: Lemire is fairly overrated and Bunn is astoundingly mediocre.

Oh hell, if Savage gets the gig, think how pissy Rob Lowe will be at The Grinder anniversary dinner!