Leftist Jewel turned into Shithole

[BS Filter]

More proof that Democrats are mentally ill.
San Francisco’s ‘poor street conditions’ a factor in city’s loss of $64M Oracle tech conference: reports

Dafuk does this link have to do with "Democrats"?

What doesn't it have to do with democrats? When Regan was governor of California, it had the strongest middle class in the WORLD...now, after all these years of democrats and the madness of modern liberalism, kalifornia has destroyed its middle class and has the highest homeless and poverty rates in the country.

Ummmm..... I think the topic is San Francisco, not California. But great flailing attempt at Association Fallacy.

I had to check. When I first saw the title I thought it was about the teenybop singer. I didn't even read the article; as usual I stopped at the first fallacy.

Businesses and taxpayers are leaving California in droves. Democrats are ruining the place.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It certainly wasn't Republican nor conservative policies that caused Than Fwanthithco to deteriorate into the literal shithole that it has become.

Ah. You'd be one of these binary-bots that thinks all matter in the universe is comprised of the two elements "Democrats" and "Republicans", is that it?

That's so cute in its stunning naïveté. Did you know that San Francisco's elections don't involve political parties? Does that make your head explode?

Each supervisor is required to live in his or her district, and although elections are ostensibly held on a non-partisan basis[12], as of 2018 all 11 supervisors are known to be members of the Democratic Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Board_of_Supervisors

Does that make your head explode?

 

[SSDD]

More proof that Democrats are mentally ill.
San Francisco’s ‘poor street conditions’ a factor in city’s loss of $64M Oracle tech conference: reports

Dafuk does this link have to do with "Democrats"?

What doesn't it have to do with democrats? When Regan was governor of California, it had the strongest middle class in the WORLD...now, after all these years of democrats and the madness of modern liberalism, kalifornia has destroyed its middle class and has the highest homeless and poverty rates in the country.

Ummmm..... I think the topic is San Francisco, not California. But great flailing attempt at Association Fallacy.

Doesn't really matter where...liberals turn wherever they are given control into a dung heap. All one need do is look around at places that have allowed modern liberalism to follow their idiotic ideas to their logical conclusions and you see the same thing....

Their ideas are simply bad...they don't raise anyone out of poverty and don't make the poor happier..they simply spread misery equally to everyone..

 

[SSDD]

More proof that Democrats are mentally ill.
San Francisco’s ‘poor street conditions’ a factor in city’s loss of $64M Oracle tech conference: reports

Dafuk does this link have to do with "Democrats"?

What doesn't it have to do with democrats? When Regan was governor of California, it had the strongest middle class in the WORLD...now, after all these years of democrats and the madness of modern liberalism, kalifornia has destroyed its middle class and has the highest homeless and poverty rates in the country.

Ummmm..... I think the topic is San Francisco, not California. But great flailing attempt at Association Fallacy.

I had to check. When I first saw the title I thought it was about the teenybop singer. I didn't even read the article; as usual I stopped at the first fallacy.

Businesses and taxpayers are leaving California in droves. Democrats are ruining the place.

They already have ruined it...I was in LA over the summer and the streets are reminiscent of a 3rd world country..the gutters are practically open sewers..

 

[Pogo]

It certainly wasn't Republican nor conservative policies that caused Than Fwanthithco to deteriorate into the literal shithole that it has become.

Ah. You'd be one of these binary-bots that thinks all matter in the universe is comprised of the two elements "Democrats" and "Republicans", is that it?

That's so cute in its stunning naïveté. Did you know that San Francisco's elections don't involve political parties? Does that make your head explode?

Each supervisor is required to live in his or her district, and although elections are ostensibly held on a non-partisan basis[12], as of 2018 all 11 supervisors are known to be members of the Democratic Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Board_of_Supervisors

Does that make your head explode?

Having my assertions confirmed doesn't make my head explode, though it's sometimes mildly surprising.

I already have linkage anyway, so that's a backup to the backup.

You know this is all a trap, right? Because even if you get this weak argument to fly, the next thing you have to do is prove an Association Fallacy. Actually that might be fun to watch. Hear that sound? That's Billy Graham and Zell Miller, cackling.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Having my assertions confirmed doesn't make my head explode, though it's sometimes mildly surprising.

I already have linkage anyway, so that's a backup to the backup.

You know this is all a trap, right? Because even if you get this weak argument to fly, the next thing you have to do is prove an Association Fallacy. Actually that might be fun to watch.

So expecting the elected people who are running the city to be responsible for the results is called an association fallacy?

And here I thought that was the definition of accountability.

 

[Pogo]

Having my assertions confirmed doesn't make my head explode, though it's sometimes mildly surprising.

I already have linkage anyway, so that's a backup to the backup.

You know this is all a trap, right? Because even if you get this weak argument to fly, the next thing you have to do is prove an Association Fallacy. Actually that might be fun to watch. Hear that sound? That's Billy Graham and Zell Miller, cackling.

So expecting the elected people who are running the city to be responsible for the results is called an association fallacy?

And here I thought that was the definition of accountability.

A lame point is followed by an even lamer deflection attempt. What, are we gonna play the "I'm too stupid to follow" game now?

The Ass-ociation Fallacy would be the concept that "being registered with a political party" somehow imparts some bizzaro set of personality traits. IT DOESN'T. Or that some person's actions --- drunk driving, sex scandal, financial impropriety etc --- somehow in Bizzaroland is a result of what their political party registration is. IT ISN'T.

Hear that sound? Frank,Rizzo and Ray Nagin have joined Billy Graham and Zell Miller in the cackling brigade. Don't make me bring Strom Thurmond out here.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A lame point is followed by an even lamer deflection attempt. What, are we gonna play the "I'm too stupid to follow" game now?

Well, it appears we agree on something. Your points are lame and getting lamer lately and everyone here sees it but you.

The Ass-ociation Fallacy would be the concept that "being registered with a political party" somehow imparts some bizzaro set of personality traits. IT DOESN'T. Or that some person's actions --- drunk driving, sex scandal, financial impropriety etc --- somehow in Bizzaroland is a result of what their political party registration is. IT ISN'T.

You're right. The fact that the same political party (which people join because they share like ideas and views) has had complete control of the city government for nearly 50 years plays absolutely no role whatsoever. How silly of anybody to make such an insinuation.

 

[Mr Natural]

California is a shithole.

No wonder it’s got the highest property values in the country.

 

[Pogo]

A lame point is followed by an even lamer deflection attempt. What, are we gonna play the "I'm too stupid to follow" game now?

Well, it appears we agree on something. Your points are lame and getting lamer lately and everyone here sees it but you.

The Ass-ociation Fallacy would be the concept that "being registered with a political party" somehow imparts some bizzaro set of personality traits. IT DOESN'T. Or that some person's actions --- drunk driving, sex scandal, financial impropriety etc --- somehow in Bizzaroland is a result of what their political party registration is. IT ISN'T.

You're right. The fact that the same political party (which people join because they share like ideas and views) has had complete control of the city government for nearly 50 years plays absolutely no role whatsoever. How silly of anybody to make such an insinuation.

SMH

People DON'T join political parties "because they share ideas and views", to quote Captain Obvious. There's ZERO benefit in that. For one thing that would mean people like me with no political party registration, don't have any views at all. It would mean that the entire voting population of the state of Vermont, has no views at all. In Vermont you don't register with a party, you just register period (maybe other states do this too, I don't know, but I know that one does).

People join a political party because that's where their power is likely to manifest. That's why I cited Frank Rizzo, Ray Nagin and Strom Thurmond, to which we could add Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Richard Shelby, Sonny Perdue, both candidates from the 2016 election, Arlen Specter, and the list goes on and on. People stay in a political party simply because they've always done so and their old, which is why I cited Zell Miller and Billy Graham. The sheriff in my town runs some years as a Democrat and other years as a Republican. He's the SAME GUY DOING THE SAME JOB IN THE SAME WAY. He just adopts whichever way he thinks the winds are blowing that year. The party is IRRELEVANT.

And then some people affiliate with a party because it's the only way to have a voice in their community when that community is dominated by one. Or because their state doesn't allow them to vote in a primary unless they're "registered" with that party --- an act which means NOTHING. It means when you register you tick this box or that box. You never hear from the party itself, you don't pay a membership fee or fill out a membership form. It's MEANINGLESS.

Y'all keep fixating on this 'Democrat" and "Republican" shit as if it means something. IT DOESN'T. A political party is a machine to consolidate power --- that's it. A means to an end, where the end is an office. It means NOTHING about personality traits, it means NOTHING about sexual improclivities, it means NOTHING about personal ideologies. It has the same meaning as when you drive to town are you taking the Honda or the Pontiac. They both get you to the same place.

And it means NOTHING about blaming an adjective when you think you have some lame message board Gotcha Moment. You might as well associate what zodiac sign they were born under or what their shoe size is; it would have just as much relevance.

Finally, this thread was about a CITY. Party politics do not play a part in the awesome responsibility decisions of which neighborhood gets its trash picked up on Wednesdays. THAT'S WHY THEIR ELECTIONS ARE NON-PARTISAN.

Don't encourage this fallacious shit. Call it out for what it is --- mendacity.


That's my spiel. Go ahead and try to counter it. Tell us how Arlen Specter the Democrat was one guy, who then became another guy as Arlen Specter the Republican, who then became a third guy as Arlen Specter the Democrat again.

 

[Pogo]

A lame point is followed by an even lamer deflection attempt. What, are we gonna play the "I'm too stupid to follow" game now?

Well, it appears we agree on something. Your points are lame and getting lamer lately and everyone here sees it but you.

The Ass-ociation Fallacy would be the concept that "being registered with a political party" somehow imparts some bizzaro set of personality traits. IT DOESN'T. Or that some person's actions --- drunk driving, sex scandal, financial impropriety etc --- somehow in Bizzaroland is a result of what their political party registration is. IT ISN'T.

You're right. The fact that the same political party (which people join because they share like ideas and views) has had complete control of the city government for nearly 50 years plays absolutely no role whatsoever. How silly of anybody to make such an insinuation.

SMH

People DON'T join political parties "because they share ideas and views", to quote Captain Obvious. There's ZERO benefit in that. For one thing that would mean people like me with no political party registration, don't have any views at all. It would mean that the entire voting population of the state of Vermont, has no views at all. In Vermont you don't register with a party, you just register period (maybe other states do this too, I don't know, but I know that one does).

People join a political party because that's where their power is likely to manifest. That's why I cited Frank Rizzo, Ray Nagin and Strom Thurmond, to which we could add Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Richard Shelby, Sonny Perdue, both candidates from the 2016 election, Arlen Specter, and the list goes on and on. People stay in a political party simply because they've always done so and their old, which is why I cited Zell Miller and Billy Graham. The sheriff in my town runs some years as a Democrat and other years as a Republican. He's the SAME GUY DOING THE SAME JOB IN THE SAME WAY. He just adopts whichever way he thinks the winds are blowing that year. The party is IRRELEVANT.

And then some people affiliate with a party because it's the only way to have a voice in their community when that community is dominated by one. Or because their state doesn't allow them to vote in a primary unless they're "registered" with that party --- an act which means NOTHING. It means when you register you tick this box or that box. You never hear from the party itself, you don't pay a membership fee or fill out a membership form. It's MEANINGLESS.

Y'all keep fixating on this 'Democrat" and "Republican" shit as if it means something. IT DOESN'T. A political party is a machine to consolidate power --- that's it. A means to an end, where the end is an office. It means NOTHING about personality traits, it means NOTHING about sexual improclivities, it means NOTHING about personal ideologies. It has the same meaning as when you drive to town are you taking the Honda or the Pontiac. They both get you to the same place.

And it means NOTHING about blaming an adjective when you think you have some lame message board Gotcha Moment. You might as well associate what zodiac sign they were born under or what their shoe size is; it would have just as much relevance.

Finally, this thread was about a CITY. Party politics do not play a part in the awesome responsibility decisions of which neighborhood gets its trash picked up on Wednesdays. THAT'S WHY THEIR ELECTIONS ARE NON-PARTISAN.

Don't encourage this fallacious shit. Call it out for what it is --- mendacity.


That's my spiel. Go ahead and try to counter it. Tell us how Arlen Specter the Democrat was one guy, who then became another guy as Arlen Specter the Republican, who then became a third guy as Arlen Specter the Democrat again.

Hell, even as ignorant an entity as the Ku Klux Klan knew this much about political parties, a hundred years ago. When the KKK got involved in electoral politics nationwide in the 1920s it got behind Democrats in places where Democrats had an advantage; it got behind Republicans in places where Republicans had an advantage; and it opposed either Democrats or Republicans depending on each case and which candidate stood to benefit them. Consequently in the "Solid South" where everybody was a Democrat, both the pro-Klan and anti-Klan elements were dominated by Democrats, simply as a coincidental statistic; in a place like Maine which was a solidly Republican as the South was Democratic, both the pro-Klan and anti-Klan forces were predominantly Republican for the same reason. In Kansas you had pro-Klan and anti-Klan governors, both Republicans. In Indiana and Colorado they got behind Republicans for no other reason than that that was the way to win the office. If you were a Bilbo Dildo in Mississippi and you wanted the office, you ran as a Democrat or you lost.

And speaking of the Klan, see also "Duke, David".

ALL of which demonstrates that there is no correlation. If you've got a Honda and a Pontiac, and the Honda is in perfect shape and the Pontiac is on its last legs, which one are you going to drive?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A lame point is followed by an even lamer deflection attempt. What, are we gonna play the "I'm too stupid to follow" game now?

Well, it appears we agree on something. Your points are lame and getting lamer lately and everyone here sees it but you.

The Ass-ociation Fallacy would be the concept that "being registered with a political party" somehow imparts some bizzaro set of personality traits. IT DOESN'T. Or that some person's actions --- drunk driving, sex scandal, financial impropriety etc --- somehow in Bizzaroland is a result of what their political party registration is. IT ISN'T.

You're right. The fact that the same political party (which people join because they share like ideas and views) has had complete control of the city government for nearly 50 years plays absolutely no role whatsoever. How silly of anybody to make such an insinuation.

SMH

People DON'T join political parties "because they share ideas and views", to quote Captain Obvious. There's ZERO benefit in that. For one thing that would mean people like me with no political party registration, don't have any views at all. It would mean that the entire voting population of the state of Vermont, has no views at all. In Vermont you don't register with a party, you just register period (maybe other states do this too, I don't know, but I know that one does).

People join a political party because that's where their power is likely to manifest. That's why I cited Frank Rizzo, Ray Nagin and Strom Thurmond, to which we could add Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, Richard Shelby, Sonny Perdue, both candidates from the 2016 election, Arlen Specter, and the list goes on and on. People stay in a political party simply because they've always done so and their old, which is why I cited Zell Miller and Billy Graham. The sheriff in my town runs some years as a Democrat and other years as a Republican. He's the SAME GUY DOING THE SAME JOB IN THE SAME WAY. He just adopts whichever way he thinks the winds are blowing that year. The party is IRRELEVANT.

And then some people affiliate with a party because it's the only way to have a voice in their community when that community is dominated by one. Or because their state doesn't allow them to vote in a primary unless they're "registered" with that party --- an act which means NOTHING. It means when you register you tick this box or that box. You never hear from the party itself, you don't pay a membership fee or fill out a membership form. It's MEANINGLESS.

Y'all keep fixating on this 'Democrat" and "Republican" shit as if it means something. IT DOESN'T. A political party is a machine to consolidate power --- that's it. A means to an end, where the end is an office. It means NOTHING about personality traits, it means NOTHING about sexual improclivities, it means NOTHING about personal ideologies. It has the same meaning as when you drive to town are you taking the Honda or the Pontiac. They both get you to the same place.

And it means NOTHING about blaming an adjective when you think you have some lame message board Gotcha Moment. You might as well associate what zodiac sign they were born under or what their shoe size is; it would have just as much relevance.

Finally, this thread was about a CITY. Party politics do not play a part in the awesome responsibility decisions of which neighborhood gets its trash picked up on Wednesdays. THAT'S WHY THEIR ELECTIONS ARE NON-PARTISAN.

Don't encourage this fallacious shit. Call it out for what it is --- mendacity.


That's my spiel. Go ahead and try to counter it. Tell us how Arlen Specter the Democrat was one guy, who then became another guy as Arlen Specter the Republican, who then became a third guy as Arlen Specter the Democrat again.

Hell, even as ignorant an entity as the Ku Klux Klan knew this much about political parties, a hundred years ago. When the KKK got involved in electoral politics nationwide in the 1920s it got behind Democrats in places where Democrats had an advantage; it got behind Republicans in places where Republicans had an advantage; and it opposed either Democrats or Republicans depending on each case and which candidate stood to benefit them. Consequently in the "Solid South" where everybody was a Democrat, both the pro-Klan and anti-Klan elements were dominated by Democrats, simply as a coincidental statistic; in a place like Maine which was a solidly Republican as the South was Democratic, both the pro-Klan and anti-Klan forces were predominantly Republican for the same reason. In Kansas you had pro-Klan and anti-Klan governors, both Republicans. In Indiana and Colorado they got behind Republicans for no other reason than that that was the way to win the office. If you were a Bilbo Dildo in Mississippi and you wanted the office, you ran as a Democrat or you lost.

And speaking of the Klan, see also "Duke, David".

ALL of which demonstrates that there is no correlation. If you've got a Honda and a Pontiac, and the Honda is in perfect shape and the Pontiac is on its last legs, which one are you going to drive?

 

[Thinker101]

Oracle’s OpenWorld conference, one of the biggest annual technology events in San Francisco, is moving to Las Vegas in 2020 and will remain in Sin City for at least three years.

Attendee feedback indicated hotel rates were too high and poor street conditions. I wonder if Pelosi's district is doing so well it didn't need that $64,000,000.

Oracle will move its annual OpenWorld conference to Las Vegas because San Francisco is too expensive

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's shitty.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That's shitty.

That's what THEY said.

 

[B. Kidd]

Vegas baby!
Our streets aren't full of shit and used hypo's at least yet anyways.

 

[Dick Foster]

Oracle’s OpenWorld conference, one of the biggest annual technology events in San Francisco, is moving to Las Vegas in 2020 and will remain in Sin City for at least three years.

Attendee feedback indicated hotel rates were too high and poor street conditions. I wonder if Pelosi's district is doing so well it didn't need that $64,000,000.

Oracle will move its annual OpenWorld conference to Las Vegas because San Francisco is too expensive

Sad but true, San Francisco is no longer the vacation destination it once was. Somehow people just aren't attracted to open sewers and drugged up junkies staggering around the streets. Never mind the ever present fag and pervert contingents.

 

[B. Kidd]

Oracle’s OpenWorld conference, one of the biggest annual technology events in San Francisco, is moving to Las Vegas in 2020 and will remain in Sin City for at least three years.

Attendee feedback indicated hotel rates were too high and poor street conditions. I wonder if Pelosi's district is doing so well it didn't need that $64,000,000.

Oracle will move its annual OpenWorld conference to Las Vegas because San Francisco is too expensive

Sad but true, San Francisco is no longer the vacation destination it once was. Somehow people just aren't attracted to open sewers and drugged up junkies staggering around the streets. Never mind the ever present fag and pervert contingents.

Combined with the fact SF's prosecutors office doesn't give a crap if someone breaks your car window and steals your stuff.
SF deserves all the pain they can bring upon themselves!

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Too expensive, too dirty, and too dangerous.

 

[Thinker101]

Oracle’s OpenWorld conference, one of the biggest annual technology events in San Francisco, is moving to Las Vegas in 2020 and will remain in Sin City for at least three years.

Attendee feedback indicated hotel rates were too high and poor street conditions. I wonder if Pelosi's district is doing so well it didn't need that $64,000,000.

Oracle will move its annual OpenWorld conference to Las Vegas because San Francisco is too expensive

Sad but true, San Francisco is no longer the vacation destination it once was. Somehow people just aren't attracted to open sewers and drugged up junkies staggering around the streets. Never mind the ever present fag and pervert contingents.

Combined with the fact SF's prosecutors office doesn't give a crap if someone breaks your car window and steals your stuff.
SF deserves all the pain they can bring upon themselves!

It would be interesting to hear what the city has to say, maybe even Nancy.