What is?

[ThxOne]

Definitely from experience. You’ve never answered when I’ve asked you to back up your claims.
You just tap dance around, avoiding the questions. Much like now, where you bring up what you think are my political leanings, in order to explain YOUR entitled attitude.

The list grows.

Let me just help you one more time. Everytime YOU ask for a question you are looking for a specific response. When you don't get the answer you wanted you claim the other person is backpedaling, tap dancing, refusing to answer and so on that doesn't mean they didn't answer you jackasss.

 

[RobGMN]

Let me just help you one more time. Everytime YOU ask for a question you are looking for a specific response. When you don't get the answer you wanted you claim the other person is backpedaling, tap dancing, refusing to answer and so on that doesn't mean they didn't answer you jackasss.

Yes. I am looking for a specific response.
If I ask you to prove one of your myriad bullshit claims (for example- the claim that in the audio world wires soldered to each other are known as "bridged"), your various responses fall along the lines of (and I paraphrase) "Go eat diicks" or "I don't need to answer you" or "I already provided an answer that you can't comprehend" or "Because I said so. Discussion over."

NONE of those types of responses address the question.
So YES, when I ask a question I am looking for a specific response: ONE THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.
Why does it anger you that I expect an answer to a question when I ask a question? Do you not understand that is how non-rhetorical questions work?

Uhmmm, "refusing to answer and so on that doesn't mean they didn't answer you" means EXACTLY that they didn't answer. A refusal to answer IS not answering.

Now that you've tapdanced around the questions for so many posts, are you willing to answer them?
CAN you answer them?

 

[ThxOne]

Yes. I am looking for a specific response.
If I ask you to prove one of your myriad bullshit claims (for example- the claim that in the audio world wires soldered to each other are known as "bridged"), your various responses fall along the lines of (and I paraphrase) "Go eat diicks" or "I don't need to answer you" or "I already provided an answer that you can't comprehend" or "Because I said so. Discussion over."

NONE of those types of responses address the question.
So YES, when I ask a question I am looking for a specific response: ONE THAT ANSWERS THE QUESTION.
Why does it anger you that I expect an answer to a question when I ask a question? Do you not understand that is how non-rhetorical questions work?

Uhmmm, "refusing to answer and so on that doesn't mean they didn't answer you" means EXACTLY that they didn't answer. A refusal to answer IS not answering.

Now that you've tapdanced around the questions for so many posts, are you willing to answer them?
CAN you answer them?

You are looking for any response you can argue. I have said it before, you could care less about getting an actual answer. You just want to be able to respond and argue to something, anything. I can answer every damn question you have ask me. I will answer them the same way you have answered most of mine.

 

[RobGMN]

You are looking for any response you can argue. I have said it before, you could care less about getting an actual answer. You just want to be able to respond and argue to something, anything. I can answer every damn question you have ask me. I will answer them the same way you have answered most of mine.

I would like to GET an “actual answer”. I’ll repeat:
Now that you've tapdanced around the questions for so many posts, are you willing to answer them?
CAN you answer them?

Go ahead and answer my requests:
Provide proof the the numbers have been “fiddled” with to alter how a state’s political leanings are represented.
Provide proof that historically speaking, Democrats have gotten more assistance from the federal government than Republicans.

 

[ThxOne]

I would like to GET an “actual answer”. I’ll repeat:
Now that you've tapdanced around the questions for so many posts, are you willing to answer them?
CAN you answer them?

Go ahead and answer my requests:
Provide proof the the numbers have been “fiddled” with to alter how a state’s political leanings are represented.
Provide proof that historically speaking, Democrats have gotten more assistance from the federal government than Republicans.

Nobody said the numbers were fiddled with. Fact of business, can you even tell me what numbers you keep talking about???

 

[RobGMN]

Nobody said the numbers were fiddled with. Fact of business, can you even tell me what numbers you keep talking about???

Does this look familiar?
“Let's base it off the assigned color of a state. THOSE numbers can't be fiddled with to get the result needed for an agenda. ”

Once again: The sarcasm indicates you believe the numbers have been fiddled with.
That’s how sarcasm works.

So who did the fiddling, and how have they not been caught?

 

[ThxOne]

Does this look familiar?
“Let's base it off the assigned color of a state. THOSE numbers can't be fiddled with to get the result needed for an agenda. ”

Once again: The sarcasm indicates you believe the numbers have been fiddled with.
That’s how sarcasm works.

So who did the fiddling, and how have they not been caught?

Ok so which numbers are you talking about? Clearly you must think I am talking about a specific set of numbers, which numbers??

 

[Buck]

World Health Organization positioning to become global health dictator while masses are distracted with "lab leaks"

Newly proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) would give the World Health Organization (WHO) dictatorial control over "public health," which now includes free speech that is deemed to be "misinformation" or "disinformation." If ratified, the

www.naturalnews.com

 

[RobGMN]

World Health Organization positioning to become global health dictator while masses are distracted with "lab leaks"

Newly proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) would give the World Health Organization (WHO) dictatorial control over "public health," which now includes free speech that is deemed to be "misinformation" or "disinformation." If ratified, the

www.naturalnews.com

You forgot to include the pertinent info about "Natural News":

"Natural News (formerly NewsTarget, which is now a separate sister site) is a far-right, anti-vaccination conspiracy theory and fake news website known for promoting alternative medicine, pseudoscience, disinformation, and far-right extremism.[1][9] The website began publishing articles in 2008 and is based in the United States.[1][6]

The site's founder, Michael Allen "Mike" Adams, gained attention after posting a blog entry implying a call for violence against proponents of GMO foods, and then allegedly creating another website with a list of names of alleged supporters. He has been accused of using "pseudoscience to sell his lies".[10] Adams has described vaccines as "medical child abuse".[11]

The website sells various dietary supplements, promotes alternative medicine and climate change denial, makes tendentious nutrition and health claims,[12] disseminates fake news,[20] and espouses various conspiracy theories and pro-Donald Trump propaganda.[21][22] These conspiracy theories include chemophobic claims about the purported dangers of "chemtrails",[5] fluoridated drinking water,[23] heavy metals, anti-perspirants, laundry detergent, monosodium glutamate, aspartame, and vaccines.[5][12][24] It has also spread conspiracy theories about the Zika virus allegedly being spread by genetically modified mosquitoes[25] and purported adverse effects of genetically modified crops, as well as the farming practices associated with and foods derived from them."

 

[Jimi77]

So you’re now saying that they’re lying about whether a state votes primarily democrat or primarily republican?

If THAT is the case, then the electoral vote that put Trump in office was a complete sham and his presidency should not have happened.
Continuing that logic, EVERY republican presidency should have been Democrat, and every Democrat presidency should have been Republican.

Are you SURE that’s the conspiracy you want to run with in order to deny who takes the most welfare?

Technically, it's not necessarily welfare. For example, Mississippi is a net tax dollar "taker" but that doesn't mean it's in welfare spending; hypothetically it could be education spending, building highways, defense programs, etc.

 

[SlugButter]

Technically, it's not necessarily welfare. For example, Mississippi is a net tax dollar "taker" but that doesn't mean it's in welfare spending; hypothetically it could be education spending, building highways, defense programs, etc.

stop bringing stuff up. You’re supposed to stick with the narrative and pencil whip people by using simple math to explain complex issues. Your facts aren’t weoponized enough for this game…….

 

[SlugButter]

Mississippi is 37% black. California is 7% black. Rob is a racist who wants to take food from the tables of black families just because they live in a Republican state. What a douchebag this guy is.

 

[RobGMN]

Technically, it's not necessarily welfare. For example, Mississippi is a net tax dollar "taker" but that doesn't mean it's in welfare spending; hypothetically it could be education spending, building highways, defense programs, etc.

When the money goes in bulk to states and then gets divided up as needed for the variety of uses (social services, infrastructure, veteran services, etc), then you could consider any money that goes to a state in excess of what the state contributes as “welfare”.

A silly example, but let’s say Kentucky contributes $1,000 to the tax base and gets back $1,900. They use the money to fix state roads that they otherwise would not have been able to fix. They have received “welfare” which is “aid in the form of money to those in need”, because they are unable to meet their own needs.

I mentioned previously that the federal funds that flow to the states get divided up amongst a variety of uses. Social welfare is a part of the basket, but not the whole basket.

 

[RobGMN]

Mississippi is 37% black. California is 7% black. Rob is a racist who wants to take food from the tables of black families just because they live in a Republican state. What a douchebag this guy is.

That’s a pretty pathetic stretch, even for the guy who gripes about welfare fraud while aiding and abetting his neighbors who are committing the fraud.
Why are you assuming that the only social welfare recipients in Mississippi are black? Racist.

 

[SlugButter]

That’s a pretty pathetic stretch, even for the guy who gripes about welfare fraud while aiding and abetting his neighbors who are committing the fraud.
Why are you assuming that the only social welfare recipients in Mississippi are black? Racist.

You specifically went after Mississippi yourself. I made no mention of that state ever before now. Those are just the numbers Rob. Are you disputing facts? You mention a state and accuse it of taking tons of welfare, and it just happens to have the most black people by percentage in the country. You’re a racist. The facts prove it.