Infedelity and politics

Originally posted by whodey
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/are-we-getting-the-leaders-1397064998158390.html

Here is an article about one Gary Hart. For those who don't know, he once ran for President and was taken down by the press for a sex scandal. He then later blamed the press for "hunting him down" like that and warned of a much more hostile political atmosphere that would de ...[text shortened]... uld withdraw all support from Ted Cruz if it could be proved that he was unfaithful to his wife.

Normally I wouldn't care much if our lawmakers were bouncing into bed with someone other than their spouse, many of them do. It's the hypocrisy that I don't like. Republican lawmakers love to showcase themselves the party of Christian pure, family values, while casting Liberals as godless perverts who are destroying the moral fabric of America. We find however that it's Republicans that are guilty of just as many extra marital affairs (or more) as Liberals Below are just a few examples:

Newt Gingrich complaining about Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky while carring on his own:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2937633&page=1

South Carolina's Mark Sanford complaining about Liberals morals, while bedding down with his Argentinian hottie.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/south-carolina-rep-mark-sanford-argentinian-fiancee-opens-affair-article-1.1490958

Republican Florida state Senator Bob Allen complaining about "morally corrupt liberals" while soliciting oral sex from an undercover MALE police officer.

http://themoderatevoice.com/now-florida-state-gop-rep-robert-bob-allen-in-sex-scandal/

Originally posted by twhitehead
Does anyone have any statistics that show that infidelity is more common amongst the rich?

No. In fact:

Do rich men cheat more than poor men? There is no evidence to suggest that they do. In fact, after controlling for a variety of different effects, it seems there is very little connection between income and cheating in men. Interestingly, though, the real effect of income on cheating is with women; poor women are significantly more likely to cheat than wealthier women.

http://bigthink.com/dollars-and-sex/income-and-infidelity

These results are pretty consistent with what you would expect from an evolutionary perspective.

Originally posted by no1marauder
No. In fact:

Do rich men cheat more than poor men? There is no evidence to suggest that they do. In fact, after controlling for a variety of different effects, it seems there is very little connection between income and cheating in men. Interestingly, though, the real effect of income on cheating is with women; poor women are significantly more likely ...[text shortened]... These results are pretty consistent with what you would expect from an evolutionary perspective.

Could it possibly be more banal.

Originally posted by Wajoma
Could it possibly be more banal.

(Shrug) I realize you can't be bothered to actually check reality to see if it conforms with your preconceived beliefs, but some people do use the scientific method to attempt to validate hypotheses.

Crazy, ain't it?

Originally posted by no1marauder
(Shrug) I realize you can't be bothered to actually check reality to see if it conforms with your preconceived beliefs, but some people do use the scientific method to attempt to validate hypotheses.

Crazy, ain't it?

The 'what' method?

The 'what' method applied to rich folk versus poor folk cheating on their partners?

That's what you call science?

Trust No1 to drop a clanger like that to lighten the mood when the debates had just about gone as low as they could go.

We need to be able to give more than one thumbs up.

Originally posted by no1marauder
(Shrug) I realize you can't be bothered to actually check reality to see if it conforms with your preconceived beliefs, but some people do use the scientific method to attempt to validate hypotheses.

Crazy, ain't it?

BTW I don't have any "preconceived beliefs" on the rich folk/poor folk cheating on partners ratio, who could actually care about those numbers, please don't tell me any public money went into this survey.

Originally posted by no1marauder
(Shrug) I realize you can't be bothered to actually check reality to see if it conforms with your preconceived beliefs, but some people do use the scientific method to attempt to validate hypotheses.

Crazy, ain't it?

What would be more interesting is how many leaves of toilet paper do rich folk use compared to poor folk when they're taking a dump.

Do you have some 'preconceived beliefs' on that one No1?

I bet they don't use any, there will a jet washer, followed by a nice warm breeze directed at their hinnie, then just the faintest mist of some ultra expensive perfume.

Originally posted by Wajoma
The 'what' method?

The 'what' method applied to rich folk versus poor folk cheating on their partners?

That's what you call science?

Trust No1 to drop a clanger like that to lighten the mood when the debates had just about gone as low as they could go.

We need to be able to give more than one thumbs up.

This might help (though since your ignorance is willful it probably won't): http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html

Yes, the scientific method can be used to explain the behavior of human beings:

sociological research is the scientific means of acquiring information about various aspects of society and social behavior. Sociologists use the scientific method. Like other scientists, they stress the accurate and unbiased collection and analysis of social data, use systematic observation, conduct experiments, and exhibit skepticism.

http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/sociology/sociological-research-methods/scientific-method-for-sociology

Crazy, ain't it?

Originally posted by Wajoma
BTW I don't have any "preconceived beliefs" on the rich folk/poor folk cheating on partners ratio, who could actually care about those numbers, please don't tell me any public money went into this survey.

A poster, twhitehead a page ago specifically asked if there was any information on the subject.

So stop trolling; if the subject doesn't interest you, maybe you should find something better to do.

Originally posted by no1marauder
A poster, twhitehead a page ago specifically asked if there was any information on the subject.

So stop trolling; if the subject doesn't interest you, maybe you should find something better to do.

My interest in toilet paper has been twuiqued (BTW that's some more french Wolfgang) by the conversation.

Originally posted by no1marauder
This might help (though since your ignorance is willful it probably won't): http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/appendixe/appendixe.html

Yes, the scientific method can be used to explain the behavior of human beings:

sociological research is the scientific means of acquiring information about various aspects of society and social behavior. S ...[text shortened]... ides/sociology/sociological-research-methods/scientific-method-for-sociology

Crazy, ain't it?

Do you think all those conditions can be accurately applied to the 5 year old 'bigthink' opinion piece?

It'd just be a whole lot better if you removed "No. In fact:"

Originally posted by Wajoma
My interest in toilet paper has been twuiqued (BTW that's some more french Wolfgang) by the conversation.

You seem to have a deep-seated fear of people more intelligent than you
with your anti-intellectual pot-shots and nonsense diatribes. That must
leave you cowering wherever you go. Stay indoors much?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Looks like he gets out in 2018, age 72. Wonder if he will get back in politics?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You seem to have a deep-seated fear of people more intelligent than you
with your anti-intellectual pot-shots and nonsense diatribes. That must
leave you cowering wherever you go. Stay indoors much?

Spent the evening riding a motorcycle around in the madness which is the traffic of Phnom Penh. How about you?

The trip home might have been slightly over the breath/alcohol limit if there were one, will not be doing that again.

Think of a round-about where no-one pauses before entering and there are a few folk going counter to the flow. If your motorcycle can carry 5 people or two full size oxygen cylinders strapped across the seat then you should do that. If you're a foreigner it pays to wear a helmet otherwise you're giving the cops an excuse to shake you down, for everyone else it's optional.

Do not assume you own your half of the road, if the road can take 3 motorcycles, a bus and a car and everyone is going the same way except you, get the hell out of the way of the oncoming traffic.

To hang with the medical/travel insurance they won't cover you for riding a motorcycle anyway.

What did you do for a shot of adrenalin tonight Wolfgang?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You seem to have a deep-seated fear of people more intelligent than you
with your anti-intellectual pot-shots and nonsense diatribes. That must
leave you cowering wherever you go. Stay indoors much?

I am curious as to how you evaluate your intelligence compared to that of Wajoma? Generally, I've found that people who brag about their intelligence do so because nobody else will.