Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

As Chicago school district, the third largest in the US and one of the most underachieving enters the 5th day of a teachers strike over pay, class size and conditions. The mayor begs teaching staff to return to work. In a City with historically poor levels of educational attainment and very high levels of unemployment. It is clear Education is not high on the Chicago list of priorities. The people of Chicago continue to be educationally disadvantaged and by demographic unlikely to gain a College education. Thoughts?

I thought this was going to be about the Chicago School of economics. To which the answer would have been: yes, it's f*cking gay.

Teachers are demanding unreasonable shit like rent control. Just the latest deal...once it fully kicks in, if you were making 72 grand you'd be making nearly 90(heard this on the radio today). Whenever I go out I see protesters, adults and kids just standing on the corner holding signs. Kids that should be in school.

Brother says his sources say it will end Friday, but who knows. The other day protesters were literally walking out into the street and I don't just mean when the light was red, they did it when it was green too.

Originally posted by Surtur
Teachers are demanding unreasonable shit like rent control. Just the latest deal...once it fully kicks in, if you were making 72 grand you'd be making nearly 90(heard this on the radio today). Whenever I go out I see protesters, adults and kids just standing on the corner holding signs. Kids that should be in school.

Brother says his sources say it will end Friday, but who knows. The other day protesters were literally walking out into the street and I don't just mean when the light was red, they did it when it was green too. This all ties in with Chicago's low performing school rating.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/chicago/2018/10/30/xx-high-schools-earn-low-performance-rating-on-new-illinois-report-card/

given the intellectual performance of chicago natives on this forum, I think the answer to the topic is a resounding "yes"

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
given the intellectual performance of chicago natives on this forum, I think the answer to the topic is a resounding "yes" Who is the Chicago native on this forum Bash?

Edit: Oh, just realised... It's Surt.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
As Chicago school district, the third largest in the US and one of the most underachieving enters the 5th day of a teachers strike over pay, class size and conditions. The mayor begs teaching staff to return to work. In a City with historically poor levels of educational attainment and very high levels of unemployment. It is clear Education is not high on the Chicago list of priorities. The people of Chicago continue to be educationally disadvantaged and by demographic unlikely to gain a College education. Thoughts?

I would imagine a large part of that problem comes from relatively high levels of poverty in many areas and even if many people don't earn below the poverty line they still don't make enough to realistically make ends meet.

The teachers union in chicago is very powerful and demands ALOT puts a huge burden on the city resources that are already lacking.

I saw a protester in a Gumby costume earlier. Props for that at least.

I've never been to Chicago so excuse my ignorance, but are the schools crappy across the whole city or just in the shithole parts of Chicago?

Originally posted by Robtard
I've never been to Chicago so excuse my ignorance, but are the schools crappy across the whole city or just in the shithole parts of Chicago?

The same few neighborhoods with all the gun violence.

Chicaco is a Left Wing City has been run by Extremely Leftist Individuals. They have Polluted and Infected the City from the Top down to its very core.
People like Adam.

Of Course Chicago is BROKEN! The Left Destroys everything it Touches.

Trump is attempting to visit Chicago for the first time since Chicagoans forced him to abort his 2016 rally. Let's see how that works out for him.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Trump is attempting to visit Chicago for the first time since Chicagoans forced him to abort his 2016 rally. Let's see how that works out for him.

I hope Trump stays safe during his visit and nothing bad happens to him so we don't have to deal with a Democrat being in office for four years.

Ugh, with how well the Democrats are doing these days with their anti-Trump and anti-GOP propaganda, they may have whipped a moronic leftist up into such a frenzy that someone tries to take out Trump.

If someone tried to take out Trump it's far more likely going to be a frothed up disgruntled Rightist who lost their job due to Trump's policies and upset that Trump hasn't made 'America great again" as promised. Easily a 94.6% chance if it going that way.

But agreed on nothing bad happening to Trump, we don't need something even worse than the Patriot Act and Homeland Security thought up by Rightist and implemented, cos that would happen if an assassination attempt were to occur now.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I hope Trump stays safe during his visit and nothing bad happens to him so we don't have to deal with a Democrat being in office for four years.

Ugh, with how well the Democrats are doing these days with their anti-Trump and anti-GOP propaganda, they may have whipped a moronic leftist up into such a frenzy that someone tries to take out Trump.

Yup, wouldn't put it past some crazed lefty at this point.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I hope Trump stays safe during his visit and nothing bad happens to him so we don't have to deal with a Democrat being in office for four years.


If Trump is assassinated or somehow otherwise incapacitated to the point that he is unable to continue on as president then Pence will become president, not a democrat.. and honestly, I think crazed lefties would realize pretty damn quickly that they'd rather have Trump than Pence anyday lol.


Or perhaps you were trying to say that if anything did happen to Trump then Pence would end-up losing the 2020 election? Considering you said "deal with a democrat in office for four years" I guess it's more likely that you were talking about the latter.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yup, wouldn't put it past some crazed lefty at this point.


It's pretty pathetic (but not at all surprising) that Robbie is making the claim that if Trump were to be assassinated that it would be a right-winger rather than a typical crazy leftist lol.

SOME Rightist like to shoot people in cowardly ways. Far more of those rightists than violent leftists.

It's not rightists responsible for a majority of gun homicides.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's not rightists responsible for a majority of gun homicides.


"Bingo."

Originally posted by Putinbot1
SOME Rightist like to shoot people in cowardly ways. Far more of those rightists than violent leftists.

They're still doing the thing where if some gangbanger with no apparent politics involved shoots another gangbanger or unfortunate innocent caught in the crossfire, they're "Leftist!", no question about it. But when some ringwinger shoots someone and they profess their shitty politics as the reason why they're murdering in either their manifesto and/or social media, then you're disrespecting the dead if it's mentioned and then politics has nothing to do with. Trumpers love their special rules.

Anyhow, seems the strike will continue to at least tomorrow. But likely this will last much longer.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Or perhaps you were trying to say that if anything did happen to Trump then Pence would end-up losing the 2020 election? Considering you said "deal with a democrat in office for four years" I guess it's more likely that you were talking about the latter.

Correct.

Pence probably couldn't win.

Originally posted by Robtard
They're still doing the thing where if some gangbanger with no apparent politics involved shoots another gangbanger or unfortunate innocent caught in the crossfire, they're "Leftist!", no question about it. But when some ringwinger shoots someone and they profess their shitty politics as the reason why they're murdering in either their manifesto and/or social media, then you're disrespecting the dead if it's mentioned and then politics has nothing to do with. Trumpers love their special rules.

Anyhow, seems the strike will continue to at least tomorrow. But likely this will last much longer.

Gangbangers: yes, most are anti-trump and Democrats.

Crazy incel shooters: from this year, almost none of been Trumpers.



So what is your point? Are you upset that you're wrong and almost no crazy shooters are Trumpers?

Too bad: deal with it. Crime has gone down sharply under Trump. You should be rejoicing because fewer people are dying due to intentional homicides.

Originally posted by Robtard
They're still doing the thing where if some gangbanger with no apparent politics involved shoots another gangbanger or unfortunate innocent caught in the crossfire, they're "Leftist!", no question about it. But when some ringwinger shoots someone and they profess their shitty politics as the reason why they're murdering in either their manifesto and/or social media, then you're disrespecting the dead if it's mentioned and then politics has nothing to do with. Trumpers love their special rules.

Anyhow, seems the strike will continue to at least tomorrow. But likely this will last much longer. Yeah, it's tabloid logic. Funny stuff.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Gangbangers: yes, most are anti-trump and Democrats.

Crazy incel shooters: from this year, almost none of been Trumpers.



So what is your point? Are you upset that you're wrong and almost no crazy shooters are Trumpers?

Too bad: deal with it. Crime has gone down sharply under Trump. You should be rejoicing because fewer people are dying due to intentional homicides.

Yeah they don't like the fact that a majority of gun violence in this country is not committed by people on the right. Seeing them bend over backwards to act like this isn't the case makes me smile. I may even whistle a jaunty tune over it.

Lol these protesters heckled me earlier today. It really doesn't endear me to their cause.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol these protesters heckled me earlier today. It really doesn't endear me to their cause.

Why?


What were you doing at the time?

How were you dressed?

Were you driving and what were you driving?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Why?


What were you doing at the time?

How were you dressed?

Were you driving and what were you driving?

They stand on busy street corners and hold flyers and stuff and some people beep their horns to show solidarity with their cause. I was driving a car and unfortunately the light turned red and I was at the very front so I'm right by the crosswalk where they are stopped waiting for the light to change. They essentially heckled me to try to get me to beep lol. They were booing and stuff.

They wanted me to beep, but nevertheless I persisted.

#MySurtvival

Originally posted by dadudemon
Gangbangers: yes, most are anti-trump and Democrats.

Crazy incel shooters: from this year, almost none of been Trumpers.



So what is your point? Are you upset that you're wrong and almost no crazy shooters are Trumpers?

Too bad: deal with it. Crime has gone down sharply under Trump. You should be rejoicing because fewer people are dying due to intentional homicides.

Source for this? Wasn't aware gangbangers were so political in their shootings.

Gaslighting.

More gaslighting.

Distraction from original point.

Originally posted by Surtur
They stand on busy street corners and hold flyers and stuff and some people beep their horns to show solidarity with their cause. I was driving a car and unfortunately the light turned red and I was at the very front so I'm right by the crosswalk where they are stopped waiting for the light to change. They essentially heckled me to try to get me to beep lol. They were booing and stuff.

They wanted me to beep, but nevertheless I persisted.

#MySurtvival

You sure showed them up.

https://i.imgur.com/yrDDXkw.jpg

Wrong thread.

?

My post was in the wrong thread.

Originally posted by Robtard
Source for this? Wasn't aware gangbangers were so political in their shootings.

The most Dangerous cities are Democrat:
https://quillette.com/2019/07/09/democrats-control-americas-most-dangerous-cities-so-why-do-they-keep-passing-the-buck-on-gun-crime/

Here is a list of the top 25 most gangster cities in the US:

https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/travel/experience/america/2018/10/17/25-most-dangerous-cities-america/1669467002/


And here is a "heat map" tool of where Democrats and Republicans live in your cities:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/republicans-democrats-cities/

Guess where gang violence/activity is concentrated the most in cities? The bluest parts. Almost without fail.


But this is just a complicated train of logic that you don't have to follow. Gangs are overwhelmingly Black and Latino. Blacks and Latinos are overwhelmingly Democrats. You didn't need a political affiliation heat map to figure this out. You're just feigning ignorance.

Originally posted by Robtard
Gaslighting.

False. By you pretending I'm gaslighting all the time, you're the one who is actually gaslighting. Here is the list of 21 deadly mass shootings:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/deadly-mass-shootings-month-2019/story?id=63449799

1. Not Trump, bank robbery.

2. Not Trump. Family dispute.

3. Not Trump. Family dispute.

4. Not Trump. Personnel dispute involving planning crimes.

5. Not Trump. Family dispute and severe mental illness.

6. Not Trump. Former Employee dispute - got fired.

7. Not Trump. Domestic dispute/family dispute.

8. Not Trump. Domestic dispute/family dispute.

9. Not Trump. Domestic dispute/family dispute.

10. Not Trump. Former Employee dispute - resigned, had disputes with coworkers.

11. Not Trump. They were known violent criminals and were frequent offenders.



And since that puts us over 50%, I don't need to keep going down the list. I can stop there. Thus, I've proved my point.


Do you have a source that says the majority of the mass shooters (the ones I called incels but I am grouping them all together even though some are not incels...just losers who did loser things) were Trumpers?

Because I have a long list of motivations for the mass shooters and almost none are "Trump." In fact, are any Trump?

Originally posted by Robtard
More gaslighting.

Well, since I proved I was right...how can it be gaslighting? You're just upset that you fell for the Democratic Propoganda machine.

I'm not Surtur: I will prove your wrong so directly and succinctly that you'll need an extra large pack of Preparation H to recover. You should know this, by now.

Unless your point was to give me an opportunity to knock down


Originally posted by Robtard
Distraction from original point.

It's not. It's not even tangentially related - it is directly related. If crime has sharply gone down under Trump, probabilistically, you can conclude that mass shootings are much more likely to not be associated with Trump than associated. You'd find at least some examples of stopped activities related to the Trump administration. Meaning, it is far more likely you'd find reasons to congratulate Trump for the reduction in violence in the US than the opposite. It's obvious why you'd want to avoid this topic: Trump is not allowed to be congratulated for anything because you want him to fail.

But don't let that derangement get in the way of critical thought.


Still love you, though.

Your thoughtful detailed responses to his points will not be returned in kind.

Originally posted by dadudemon

But this is just a complicated train of logic that you don't have to follow. Gangs are overwhelmingly Black and Latino. Blacks and Latinos are overwhelmingly Democrats. You didn't need a political affiliation heat map to figure this out. You're just feigning ignorance.



Thanks for those entirely unrelated factoids.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Thanks for those entirely unrelated factoids.

If you'd like to prove that American gangsters are not overwhelmingly Democrats, be my guest. I did a great job proving that they are overwhelmingly Democrats.



Also, you're not using the word "factoids" correctly.

You're aware that the vast majority of people from those areas aren't gangsters, right?

Originally posted by Robtard
Source for this? Wasn't aware gangbangers were so political in their shootings.



While their shootings are more than likely not politically motivated the VAST majority of shootings are from "gangbangers." Politically motived shootings get far more hype but realistically are such a small threat its ridiculous to even present them statistically.

Originally posted by Robtard
Source for this? Wasn't aware gangbangers were so political in their shootings.

Gaslighting.

More gaslighting.

Distraction from original point.


I could see the point about incels, since many tend to be "basement dwelling neck beards" that fancy themselves libertarians.


Libertarians are most definitely anti-Trump, in my experience.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You're aware that the vast majority of people from those areas aren't gangsters, right?

*Areas are overwhelmingly Democrats
*Gang activity in those ares is overwhelmingly local by local residents

You have a very difficult point to prove. If you'd like to prove that gangsters are even a simple majority Trumpers, be my guest.

Do you have any evidence that gangsters are weirdly opposite of their fellow residents? Do you have evidence that bad guys are a simple majority pro-Trump?






Teehee

Originally posted by dadudemon
*Areas are overwhelmingly Democrats
*Gang activity in those ares is overwhelmingly local by local residents

You have a very difficult point to prove. If you'd like to prove that gangsters are even a simple majority Trumpers, be my guest.

Do you have any evidence that gangsters are weirdly opposite of their fellow residents? Do you have evidence that bad guys are a simple majority pro-Trump?






Teehee

You're making incorrect assumptions again.

If you're going to show that gangsters overwhelmingly vote democrat, first you have to show that the majority of those gangsters even vote at all.

I'll even give you a starting point. Look up the stats for the average age of gang members in the US.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
I'll even give you a starting point. Look up the stats for the average age of gang members in the US. oh my!

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You're making incorrect assumptions again.

If you're going to show that gangsters overwhelmingly vote democrat, first you have to show that the majority of those gangsters even vote at all.

Why do they have to vote? They could be overwhelmingly democrats in their thoughts/beliefs/convictions and never vote.

That's similar to saying to prove someone is Christian you need to prove they go to church.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You're making incorrect assumptions again.

If you're going to show that gangsters overwhelmingly vote democrat, first you have to show that the majority of those gangsters even vote at all.

Not so fast with the strawman goalpost moving, my friend.

Not talking about voting, talking about being Trumpers or Democrats.

And I've proven that they are overwhelmingly Democrats. My job is done. It is now up to you to prove your assumption which is gangsters are significantly different from the places that they live. Meaning, you wish to prove that they are statistical outliers and do not show up in the data at the view I am presenting.

And I'm ready for you to make that case. Please present your evidence for your assumption. Where is it?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Not so fast with the strawman goalpost moving, my friend.

Not talking about voting, talking about being Trumpers or Democrats.

And I've proven that they are overwhelmingly Democrats. My job is done. It is now up to you to prove your assumption which is gangsters are significantly different from the places that they live. Meaning, you wish to prove that they are statistical outliers and do not show up in the data at the view I am presenting.

And I'm ready for you to make that case. Please present your evidence for your assumption. Where is it?

So you're going on, how do lots of KMC posters put it?

Fee-fees

Catch me up here:



Why is there even a debate trying to pigeonhole Gang Bangers into the left or right?



I mean, personally, I'd take the very bigoted stance that a gang of minorities certainly wouldn't be pro Trump, much less pro Republican, because, come on.


Why would any group of young, angry minorities (Notwithstanding notable exceptions) back a party or person associated with old white guys who support the KKK and child molesting priests? (Or so the perception of the Cons goes)

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
So you're going on, how do lots of KMC posters put it?

Fee-fees

So you can't prove your point and only can go by how you feel about your fact-contradicting assumptions?

Originally posted by cdtm
Catch me up here:

Why is there even a debate trying to pigeonhole Gang Bangers into the left or right?

I mean, personally, I'd take the very bigoted stance that a gang of minorities certainly wouldn't be pro Trump, much less pro Republican, because, come on.

Why would any group of young, angry minorities (Notwithstanding notable exceptions) back a party or person associated with old white guys who support the KKK and child molesting priests? (Or so the perception of the Cons goes)

Democrats do not want to be associated with the idea that almost all violent offenders who register to vote, register as Democrats.



Dammit, I just revealed my hand. The game is up, I guess.

Originally posted by dadudemon
So you can't prove your point and only can go by how you feel about your fact-contradicting assumptions?



You use a heat map to prove your point. A heat map based on polling data.

So apparently you can use actual voting records but when I do it that's somehow moving the goalposts.

So let's use data.

30% of gang members are not old enough to vote.

Between black and Latino populations in the 2016 election there was an approximately 53% turn out of eligible voters.

So 53% of your remaining 70% is 37.1%

So even if gangsters 100% mirror the population and 100% of those that voted, voted Democrat, that's still not a majority of gang members voting Democrat.

That's before we eliminate which % of those gang members are in prison or have felonies making even more of them ineligible to vote.

But hey, they "feel" Democrat... according to you and based on nothing.

Holy shit people really seem to wanna do anything they can to try to say it is the right doing most of the shootings in this country. Sad, but wrong. Deal with it.

Did Jaden say that?

If he didn't then it doesn't apply to him.

fee-fees?

Originally posted by cdtm
Catch me up here:



Why is there even a debate trying to pigeonhole Gang Bangers into the left or right?



I mean, personally, I'd take the very bigoted stance that a gang of minorities certainly wouldn't be pro Trump, much less pro Republican, because, come on.


Why would any group of young, angry minorities (Notwithstanding notable exceptions) back a party or person associated with old white guys who support the KKK and child molesting priests? (Or so the perception of the Cons goes)

Because some people seem to be under the impression the right commits a majority of gun violence. DDM slapped down this notion with facts and fee fee's were impacted.

I'm so sorry this is happening to them.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You use a heat map to prove your point. A heat map based on polling data.

So apparently you can use actual voting records but when I do it that's somehow moving the goalposts.

So let's use data.

30% of gang members are not old enough to vote.

Between black and Latino populations in the 2016 election there was an approximately 53% turn out of eligible voters.

So 53% of your remaining 70% is 37.1%

So even if gangsters 100% mirror the population and 100% of those that voted, voted Democrat, that's still not a majority of gang members voting Democrat.

That's before we eliminate which % of those gang members are in prison or have felonies making even more of them ineligible to vote.

But hey, they "feel" Democrat... according to you and based on nothing.

Yup, you moved the goalposts. Why does no one learn that trying to use strawman or goalpost moves on me, never work? You'd think someone like you would have leaned that after over a decade.

Anyway, the point was never "voting Democrat." You are trying to force the conversation to an absolute population measure of voter turnout among minority gang members: not gonna fly. That was never the argument and I'm not stupid enough to move the conversation that direction just so you can be right.


Robtard's original point:



Which is overwhelmingly true. Gangsters doing gang things are overwhelmingly Democrats or vote Democrat at the polls, according to the heat maps.




Which is not true.

Almost all gang violence is committed by people who identify as Democrats. Heat maps show that gangs live in Democrat-covens in major cities.

Gangsters do mirror the population!


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716213502931


For example:



Ahahahaha, weeeeee! And it gets worse! Minority violent felons, upon release, register Democrat even more than the average! haermm

It's like...I can't even tailor make my points more excellent to directly prove you wrong. It's just right all there...stating Jaden is wrong.

"This gangster is likely a Democrat or will vote Democrat when they go to the polls" is a true statement. It can be worded even more strongly, "This gangster is very likely to be a Democrat or vote Democrat at the polls."




Here's a recap:


Robtard mocks the notion that Gangster are leftists/Democrats.

But it's true in an overwhelmingly majority of cases.

You chime in with goalpost moving, a couple of strawman, and "doubt trolling."

But you didn't know you were wrong even with your "doubt trolling."

Originally posted by dadudemon


Anyway, the point was never "voting Democrat." You are trying to force the conversation to an absolute population measure of voter turnout among minority gang members: not gonna fly. That was never the argument and I'm not stupid enough to move the conversation that direction just so you can be right."

And this is the crux of it. Heat maps are derived from voting statistics.

You used them. So I'm not moving the goalposts.

When I use them to show you're wrong suddenly it's about feelings and not about statistics.

So if we're going to take your "62% of felons register as democrats" then we need complimentary statistics.

1. What % of felons register to vote? Your statistic.said 1/3. So you're already in a minority of felons as democrats which defeats your own argument.
2. What % of felons are gangsters? (Couldn't find stats because I'm drunk)
3. What % of felons are black or Latino? (It's 59%)

So even with only 2 qualifiers were down to just over 1/6th of black or Latino gangsters registering as Democrats.


"Overwhelming majority" though.

Originally posted by Surtur
If he didn't then it doesn't apply to him.

I didn't. 👍