Originally posted by savage4731So if we were to divide the postgraduate category in several subcategories the "aberration" would disappear?
Only a moron would admit he's wrong when he isn't.
First, I understand what the word means but its apparent you don't. Go back to dictionary.com and try again.
The year doesn't determine whether something is an aberration or not. If a chess player played the Trompowsky it would be an aberration. If he played it again next year- it would STILL be a ...[text shortened]... ing be a deviation from something that was never part of the conversation to begin with?
Originally posted by KazetNagorraHuh?
So if we were to divide the postgraduate category in several subcategories the "aberration" would disappear?
No, its an aberration from the trend.
Is the word "aberration" really giving y'all that much trouble? Replace it with deviation. Its a deviation from the trend.
Originally posted by savage4731The trend is that people with postgraduate education tend to vote Democrat. The figures clearly show this.
Huh?
No, its an aberration from the trend.
Is the word "aberration" really giving y'all that much trouble? Replace it with deviation. Its a deviation from the trend.
Y'all argue these semantics and similar arguments like a guy who's down 5 pawns yet refuses to resign and wants to take as much time as possible on every move. I'll never understand the point of this. You're wrong. Just admit it and move on. Grinding through for 50 pages on some semantics argument just to have something to hold on to doesn't make you look better.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThat's fine and all but it has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
The trend is that people with postgraduate education tend to vote Democrat. The figures clearly show this.
The original statement was that as education increased people were more likely to vote for McCain. Thats obviously true. Now you're trying to turn the graph sideways, start talking about 1992 and say that proves a trend in 2008? Huh? It doesn't. different years dont have an effect on 2008. Thats like me asking what the fads for 2011 are and you start talking about pet rocks and pac man.
Originally posted by savage4731Well you simply have to talk about more than two or three years if you seek to claim there has been an aberration.
That's fine and all but it has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
The original statement was that as education increased people were more likely to vote for McCain. Thats obviously true. Now you're trying to turn the graph sideways, start talking about 1992 and say that proves a trend in 2008? Huh? It doesn't. different years dont have an ...[text shortened]... like me asking what the fads for 2011 are and you start talking about pet rocks and pac man.
Originally posted by FMFI didn't say anything close to that. If you somehow got that from what I said then think the problem is on your end. I never claimed to know what other conservatives thought. I gave my opinion. I explained what the generl perception of liberals is . The rest is just pulled out of who knows where by you.
Well then have another go at answering the question then because you are not communicating your ideas at all well.