• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tomi Lahren (making no sense at all) WARNING

They still don't seem to know WTF to do with her.
It was funny how like the episode before this one they negotiated the details if this segment over the air.
 
Jaygodmedia said:
I think the time has come for a new kinda Civil War because clearly the far left and far right does not see America in the same way. One side are a bunch of whiners and think they are right on everything. The other side tends to just deal in common sense.[/QUOTE ]

I wouldnt put down the right wing that way... some of them do try to deal with common sense. Some may whine and pretend not to understand things things like Black Lives Matter or how Trump’s comments could be perceived as unnecessarily divisive, but I have found on this forum and elsewhere that they can be engaged in constructive debate. Of course, unlike wishy-washy liberals, who constantly engage in “on the other hand” debates, they do seem sure of themselves, but I think they are just following Trump’s lead and don’t really believe his baloney.
Click to expand...
 
Nickyjo said:
I think the time has come for a new kinda Civil War because clearly the far left and far right does not see America in the same way. One side are a bunch of whiners and think they are right on everything. The other side tends to just deal in common sense.[/QUOTE ]

I wouldnt put down the right wing that way... some of them do try to deal with common sense. Some may whine and pretend not to understand things things like Black Lives Matter or how Trump’s comments could be perceived as unnecessarily divisive, but I have found on this forum and elsewhere that they can be engaged in constructive debate. Of course, unlike wishy-washy liberals, who constantly engage in “on the other hand” debates, they do seem sure of themselves, but I think they are just following Trump’s lead and don’t really believe his baloney.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the angry left have any idea how they make all the left look? It's one think to express opinion, but the actual physical attacks are almost always from the left. The right remains more civilized.

Liberals need to start publicly denounce such people.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I wonder if the angry left have any idea how they make all the left look? It's one think to express opinion, but the actual physical attacks are almost always from the left. The right remains more civilized.

Liberals need to start publicly denounce such people.
Click to expand...

Stop with that nonsense. Everyone knows that there's a bookkend on the other end of the shelf. Even you know it.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Have a verifiable example of her lying?
Click to expand...

Plenty.

For starters, there was her recent claim that "black men are 18.5% more likely to kill a police officer than a police officer is to kill an unarmed black man".....a "fact" that was actually just a completely unsubstantiated statement from a right wing columnist who popularized another pseudo-academic factoid, i.e. the so-called "Ferguson Effect".

Tomi Lahren's entire schtick is making bold statements based upon misleading or false information. That's what she does.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I wonder if the angry left have any idea how they make all the left look? It's one think to express opinion, but the actual physical attacks are almost always from the left. The right remains more civilized.

Liberals need to start publicly denounce such people.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.

The FACTS show the exact opposite is true. The vast majority of political (and politically motivated) violence comes from right wingers in this country.

Being a right winger does not give license to promote right wing myths, lies and anti-intellectual talking points without being corrected. And when right wingers like you DO what you just did, they only justify the well-deserved reputation (outside of the conservative media bubble) that so many of them CONSTANTLY whine and complain about.
 
ultmd said:
Plenty.

For starters, there was her recent claim that "black men are 18.5% more likely to kill a police officer than a police officer is to kill an unarmed black man".....a "fact" that was actually just a completely unsubstantiated statement from a right wing columnist who popularized another pseudo-academic factoid, i.e. the so-called "Ferguson Effect".

Tomi Lahren's entire schtick is making bold statements based upon misleading or false information. That's what she does.
Click to expand...

It was 18.5x not %
(The 36 unarmed black male victims of police shootings in 2015 measured against the total black male population [nearly 19 million in mid-2014, per the Census Bureau] amounts to a per capita rate of 0.0000018 unarmed fatalities by police. By comparison, 52 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in 2015 while engaged in such duties as traffic stops and warrant service, according to the*National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. The FBI counted nearly 628,000 full-time law enforcement officers in the United States in 2014. Assuming that the number of officers did not markedly increase in 2015, the per capita rate of officers being feloniously killed is 0.000082, or 45 times the rate at which unarmed black males are killed by cops. The Memorial Fund does not have data on the race of cop-killers in 2015, but applying the historical average over the last decade in which*40 percent of all cop-killers were black*would yield 21 cops killed by blacks in 2015. An officer's chance of getting killed by a black person is 0.000033, which is 18.5 times the chance of an unarmed black person getting killed by a cop. After this year's 72 percent increase in felonious killings of police officers, these ratios will be even more lopsided.)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ultmd said:
Plenty.

For starters, there was her recent claim that "black men are 18.5% more likely to kill a police officer than a police officer is to kill an unarmed black man".....a "fact" that was actually just a completely unsubstantiated statement from a right wing columnist who popularized another pseudo-academic factoid, i.e. the so-called "Ferguson Effect".

Tomi Lahren's entire schtick is making bold statements based upon misleading or false information. That's what she does.
Click to expand...

Do you ever verify the lies you repeat, or do you just believe them because of confirmation bias?


And police officers are at greater risk from blacks than unarmed blacks are from police officers. If we accept at face value The Post’s typology of “unarmed” victims, which I discussed yesterday, the per capita rate of officers being feloniously killed is 45 times higher than the rate at which unarmed black males are killed by cops. And an officer’s chance of getting killed by a black assailant is 18.5 times higher than the chance of an unarmed black getting killed by a cop.

(The 36 unarmed black male victims of police shootings in 2015 measured against the total black male population [nearly 19 million in mid-2014, per the Census Bureau] amounts to a per capita rate of 0.0000018 unarmed fatalities by police. By comparison, 52 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in 2015 while engaged in such duties as traffic stops and warrant service, according to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. The FBI counted nearly 628,000 full-time law enforcement officers in the United States in 2014. Assuming that the number of officers did not markedly increase in 2015, the per capita rate of officers being feloniously killed is 0.000082, or 45 times the rate at which unarmed black males are killed by cops. The Memorial Fund does not have data on the race of cop-killers in 2015, but applying the historical average over the last decade in which 40 percent of all cop-killers were black would yield 21 cops killed by blacks in 2015. An officer’s chance of getting killed by a black person is 0.000033, which is 18.5 times the chance of an unarmed black person getting killed by a cop. After this year’s 72 percent increase in felonious killings of police officers, these ratios will be even more lopsided.)
​

https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2014/tables/table_47_leos_fk_race_and_sex_of_known_offender_2005-2014.xls

From this article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ce-shootings-and-race/?utm_term=.53387a3b5983

Now if she was wrong, she was going by what was in the Washington Post.
 
ultmd said:
Nonsense.

The FACTS show the exact opposite is true. The vast majority of political (and politically motivated) violence comes from right wingers in this country.

Being a right winger does not give license to promote right wing myths, lies and anti-intellectual talking points without being corrected. And when right wingers like you DO what you just did, they only justify the well-deserved reputation (outside of the conservative media bubble) that so many of them CONSTANTLY whine and complain about.
Click to expand...

If believing that makes you sleep better at night, then OK...
 
Lord of Planar said:
If believing that makes you sleep better at night, then OK...
Click to expand...

In an argument between a logical person and illogical person, the logical person is always going to lose because the illogical person isn’t playing by the same rules. The misappropriations and misinterpretations run so deep that you’ll just get shouted down, or personally attacked, and you’re not going to change anyone’s mind.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
In an argument between a logical person and illogical person, the logical person is always going to lose because the illogical person isn’t playing by the same rules. The misappropriations and misinterpretations run so deep that you’ll just get shouted down, or personally attacked, and you’re not going to change anyone’s mind.
Click to expand...

Yep. The liberal hate speech is too intense to rationally argue against.
 
67233450d1527210693-tomi-lahren-making-no-sense-all-warning-negantrump-jpg
 
Lord of Planar said:
Do you ever verify the lies you repeat, or do you just believe them because of confirmation bias?
Click to expand...

:lamo This is projection. Confirmation Bias is EXACTLY what you've been demonstrating in this thread. That said, you'll never find me lying on this board. Even if I was ever so inclined, I wouldn't need to lie, because most of you right wingers are so utterly unschooled and unprepared to defend your idiotic opinions and fake-news-derived "facts".....as you are about to see, moving forward.

And police officers are at greater risk from blacks than unarmed blacks are from police officers. If we accept at face value The Post’s typology of “unarmed” victims, which I discussed yesterday, the per capita rate of officers being feloniously killed is 45 times higher than the rate at which unarmed black males are killed by cops. And an officer’s chance of getting killed by a black assailant is 18.5 times higher than the chance of an unarmed black getting killed by a cop....The Memorial Fund does not have data on the race of cop-killers in 2015, but applying the historical average over the last decade in which 40 percent of all cop-killers were black would yield 21 cops killed by blacks in 2015. An officer’s chance of getting killed by a black person is 0.000033, which is 18.5 times the chance of an unarmed black person getting killed by a cop. After this year’s 72 percent increase in felonious killings of police officers, these ratios will be even more lopsided.)
​
Click to expand...

:lamo Exhibit A, above. Unlike you, actually know what I'm talking about. Like most right wing ideologues, you read opinion pieces as "hard news", because those are the only readily available mainstream sources that right wingers like you can find to re-affirm their existing biases. But re-read my previous remarks and you'll see that you just posted the EXACT OP/ED piece....based upon unsubstantiated statement from a right wing columnist.....that I was talking about. And if you continue to educate yourself, you'll also notice that (just as I said in my previous remarks) the author is the same person who popularized the widely debunked pseudo-academic "theory" known as the "Ferguson Effect". I'm sure you're aware of that term, because it was WILDLY popular and considered a "fact" within the right wing/fake news media a few years ago.

The FACT of the matter is that her "18.5x" number was based upon a series of assumptions..........assumptions that, even if accepted as valid (which is not possible), could NOT have been reached without using the SAME variables to calculate that the corresponding number for white men (i.e. likelihood that a white man will kill a cop vs. being killed by a cop)..........would be 158X!!! That right, if we accept the author's calculations as valid (which we cannot, because they are based on ASSUMPTIONS rather than objective data).............the author's own formula would show that white men are almost 8.5 times MORE LIKELY to kill a police officer than black men!!!

Got that, buddy??? Of course, being a right winger, I already know that you have absolutely no interest in anything that doesn't re-affirm your existing fact-free biases. But that's not really my problem. My obligation is to present the FACTS, and let ideologues like you make fools of yourselves.

So, to be totally clear about this......the views expressed by that pseudo-academic right wing columnist were in an OPINION PIECE, not the news section of the WaPo. Furthermore, they were examined and discredited, and did NOT represent the views of the WaPo. They were her opinions, which were CLEARLY written with the intent to deceive the reader. Like a lot of right wingers, she CHERRY-PICKED her data....created an invalid "formula".........and used her results to promote her long-held personal beliefs about the myth of black criminality.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2014/tables/table_47_leos_fk_race_and_sex_of_known_offender_2005-2014.xls
Click to expand...

Wrong table.

From this article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ce-shootings-and-race/?utm_term=.53387a3b5983

Now if she was wrong, she was going by what was in the Washington Post.
Click to expand...

Yes, she's wrong. Tomi Lahren was wrong because she MINDLESSLY quoted an obscure and discredited "fact" from a right wing columnist. Like a lot of right wingers, she didn't bother to check her "facts" because (1) she's not intellectually equipped to do so, and (2) she doesn't seek truth or facts, she seeks AFFIRMATION of her existing biases.....at all cost. Her "fact" (i.e. that black men are 18.5 times more likely to kill a cop than to be killed by one).....was just alt-right propaganda that conveniently RE-AFFIRMED her existing biases .
 
All that shows you misunderstand.

From that previous post, I also said "Now if she was wrong, she was going by what was in the Washington Post. "
 
ultmd said:
Plenty.

For starters, there was her recent claim that "black men are 18.5% more likely to kill a police officer than a police officer is to kill an unarmed black man".....a "fact" that was actually just a completely unsubstantiated statement from a right wing columnist who popularized another pseudo-academic factoid, i.e. the so-called "Ferguson Effect".

Tomi Lahren's entire schtick is making bold statements based upon misleading or false information. That's what she does.
Click to expand...

Yes, and as Vito Corleone said to drug dealer Solazzo, “It doesn’t make any difference to me how a man makes his living.” She is an Coulter/Ingraham blond meanie wannabe.
 
Nickyjo said:
Yes, and as Vito Corleone said to drug dealer Solazzo, “It doesn’t make any difference to me how a man makes his living.” She is an Coulter/Ingraham blond meanie wannabe.
Click to expand...
Heres her reply to that statement
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom