Dear Black Voter..

[SneekyNinja]

1. It is peer reviewed and lists sources for every claim.
2. You cited and I quote "it is widely known".
3. I only cited the peer-reviewed research that lists dozens of sources. There is no shortage of other sources but I need not cite them as it is sufficient and you've cited nothing.

The fact is, the Weimar Republic had nationalized resources and infrastructure and the NAZI's reprivatized them when they wen't on a bent to purge Europe of socialists and communists and then got stopped dead in their tracks and toppled by the communist Red Army.

You cited an unpublished, undergraduate paper...not a peer reviewed, published study.

You don't even know the difference and thats what makes this all the more comical.

 

[abandonconflict]

You cited an unpublished, undergraduate paper...not a peer reviewed, published study.

You don't even know the difference and thats what makes this all the more comical.

It is peer reviewed and published ya dingus. That's what you get when you explicate an argument before reading it. Just because it was undertaken at a university doesn't mean the authors were not researchers with solid citations. Even if they were clergy or children (they were neither) it would make their research no less sound.

Just stop, you're not effective.

 

[SneekyNinja]

It is peer reviewed and published ya dingus. That's what you get when you explicate an argument before reading it. Just because it was undertaken at a university doesn't mean the authors were not researchers with solid citations. Even if they were clergy or children (they were neither) it would make their research no less sound.

Just stop, you're not effective.

Lol, you're the one quoting undergraduate papers that were never published in a journal of repute and claiming victory based on that one paper.

It's not even a study, it's an undergraduate paper, do you know what that means?

 

[ttystikk]

Lol, you're the one quoting undergraduate papers that were never published in a journal of repute and claiming victory based on that one paper.

It's not even a study, it's an undergraduate paper, do you know what that means?

Do you have any idea at all how stupid you are?

Just stop. You're an embarrassment to yourself, your family and humanity in general.

 

[ttystikk]

1. It is peer reviewed and lists sources for every claim.
2. You cited and I quote "it is widely known".
3. I only cited the peer-reviewed research that lists dozens of sources. There is no shortage of other sources but I need not cite them as it is sufficient and you've cited nothing.

The fact is, the Weimar Republic had nationalized resources and infrastructure and the NAZI's reprivatized them when they wen't on a bent to purge Europe of socialists and communists and then got stopped dead in their tracks and toppled by the communist Red Army.

Well, the Red Army had help. Patton, Montgomery and Eisenhower provided some annoyances on Hitler's Western flank...

 

[SneekyNinja]

Do you have any idea at all how stupid you are?

Just stop. You're an embarrassment to yourself, your family and humanity in general.

So you think Hitler privatized industry too?

You Cucks are hopeless, you're literally citing an undergraduate paper (ie. it means fuck all) against recorded quantative historical data.

The paper is even titled "Against the Mainstream..."

Here's a dollar guys, go get some cents.

 

[abandonconflict]

So you think Hitler privatized industry too?

You Cucks are hopeless, you're literally citing an undergraduate paper (ie. it means fuck all) against recorded quantative historical data.

The paper is even titled "Against the Mainstream..."

Here's a dollar guys, go get some cents.

You talk like a Trump supporter. Getting the last word doesn't make you any less wrong.

 

[SneekyNinja]

You talk like a Trump supporter. Getting the last word doesn't make you any less wrong.

All those people that died and not even 100 years later you're already rewriting history to try win an argument on the internet.

Try get some sleep, you're obviously delirious.

 

[abandonconflict]

All those people that died and not even 100 years later you're already rewriting history to try win an argument on the internet.

Try get some sleep, you're obviously delirious.

1/10 you need troll lessons. I get that you need validation because you are a Trump supporter in denial who defends Hitler on internet forums and lies about having an education but do try to sharpen your logic.

 

[SneekyNinja]

1/10 you need troll lessons. I get that you need validation because you are a Trump supporter in denial who defends Hitler on internet forums and lies about having an education but do try to sharpen your logic.

I defended Hitler?

You're completely retarded if that's what you got from what I said.

 

[abandonconflict]

I defended Hitler?

You're completely retarded if that's what you got from what I said.

You talk like a Trump supporter too, and argue like one.

 

[SneekyNinja]

You talk like a Trump supporter too, and argue like one.

Cool story.

You cant win the debate so you resort to repeating yourself and then declaring victory.

I'm just waiting for you to say "I'm just trolling!" as your last pathetic defense.

 

[tampee]

Who said your racist?

It's okay not to like a white women.

@UncleBuck insinuated that a bunch of racists came out of the woods to keep an old white lady out of office. These racists were perfectly fine with a middle aged black man mind you.

 

[schuylaar]

That's pretty sad even for someone who had to move to South America to make their veteran benefits more worthwhile.

.

Why the personal attack?

Edit: What do you say to the country who allowed @abandonconflict to put his life up only to be able to not live in it due to lack affordability? That's a pretty big fuck you to our troops.

 

[schuylaar]

@UncleBuck insinuated that a bunch of racists came out of the woods to keep an old white lady out of office. These racists were perfectly fine with a middle aged black man mind you.

Well, racism can work both ways. You're black and show for black; hatred of one white woman got you one sad (bad) white man.

If you could do it over, knowing what you know now..would you vote and encourage others within your community to do same?

 

[ttystikk]

Why the personal attack?

Because he lost the debate.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Why the personal attack?

Because he declared victory for no reason and he's obviously high on meth or something because he's literally making no sense.

Personal feelings aside, facts are facts and they're trying to rewrite history based on a single paper and then stick their heads in the sand instead of doing even a tiny bit of research themselves.

It's really simple:
If you Google "Hitler privatized industry" you get that one joke paper they keep depending on as a source.

If you Google "Hitler nationalized industry" you get hundreds of sources from hundreds of academic institutions based on actual economic data from the time of the Third Reich.

As I've said, personal feelings aside, which do you think is the more reliable source?

This isn't a debate about feelings or opinions, this is about literal historical fact.

 

[schuylaar]

While I agree black voter turnout was indeed way lower than expected it can't be denied that there were other factors that gave us a Trump Presidency call it the perfect storm of politics.

White women helped Trump get elected both non college and college educated the facts bare this out.

Although Florida is on the east coast it was too close to call and results didn't come in until AFTER the west coast polls closed meantime the states of Pa., MI. and Wis. we're called for Trump pushing him over the top...less than 80,000 votes total. Pa. = 44,292, Mi. = 10,704, Wi. = 22,748.

In my voting state alone (Pa.) there were 7 counties that voted for Trump with little number of blacks in it (Northampton, Carbon, Montour, Lucerne, Columbia, Pike and Bucks)

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president

https://qz.com/833003/election-2016-all-women-voted-overwhelmingly-for-clinton-except-the-white-ones/

There were many factors, however this was notable and never discussed here.

Good post

 

[schuylaar]

Because he declared victory for no reason and he's obviously high on meth or something because he's literally making no sense.

Personal feelings aside, facts are facts and they're trying to rewrite history based on a single paper and then stick their heads in the sand instead of doing even a tiny bit of research themselves.

It's really simple:
If you Google "Hitler privatized industry" you get that one joke paper they keep depending on as a source.

If you Google "Hitler nationalized industry" you get hundreds of sources from hundreds of academic institutions based on actual economic data from the time of the Third Reich.

As I've said, personal feelings aside, which do you think is the more reliable source?

This isn't a debate about feelings or opinions, this is about literal historical fact.

I'm pretty sure he doesn't do meth..thank you for explaining your position.

 

[tampee]

Well, racism can work both ways. You're black and show for black; hatred of one white woman got you one sad (bad) white man.

If you could do it over, knowing what you know now..would you vote and encourage others within your community to do same?

I voted for a white man Gary Johnson. Yes I would do the same and encourage others to vote for Johnson like I did.

Has nothing to do with Hillary being a woman just a horrible person I almost liked Jill Stien but she sounded like a communist.