I apply every day, my dude.

Push polls aren't really polls and ask questions designed to sway your opinion

"Knowing that Calvin puts bananas up his ass every day, would you still vote for him?"

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:Push polls aren't really polls and ask questions designed to sway your opinion

"Knowing that Calvin puts bananas up his ass every day, would you still vote for him?"

You're talking about push poles there.

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote:Re: Clinton foundation donations. One reason that it's frowned upon is that favors/donations literally affect the brain's perception of the donor. It doesn't have to be conscious corruption at all.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20631188

The results raise the important possibility that monetary favors bias judgments in domains seemingly unrelated to the favor but nevertheless act in an implicit way through neural networks that underlie normal, ongoing preference judgments.

Based on your post history it's doubtful you intended it to diminish all the drumpfian Foundation corruption fooforah, but that's essentially what this contribution of yours accomplishes

It's an interesting study that I came across in an actual book I was reading. Thought of how, even if we trust our politicians to do the right thing, conflicts of interest cause the instinctual parts of our brain to trigger. We can't help but be influenced.

Grayson crushed in the Florida primary. Let's hope he goes away.

It's called reciprocity

Woody wrote:It's called reciprocity

Right, you get it. But i realize that was lost in the discussions about how the Clinton foundation accepted donations from abc donor, but it had no effect on her decision-making process. Reciprocity, or the effect that favor giving has on the brain, means something much less than quid pro quo. It means that a person cannot hope to be "objective." Not even philosopher kings could do that!

So monetary contributions to a politician can bias the politician in favor of the contributor. Did that author actually get paid to come up with that revelation?

Rubio wins his primary by more than 50%. $8 mil well spent Beruff, you shitbag.

Now McCain's turn, will be closer.

JFLNYC wrote:So monetary contributions to a politician can bias the politician in favor of the contributor. Did that author actually get paid to come up with that revelation?

do you agree with the implication that donations to the CF influenced decisions in the State Dept?

Werthless wrote:Thought of how, even if we trust our politicians to do the right thing, conflicts of interest cause the instinctual parts of our brain to trigger. We can't help but be influenced.

It is certainly amazing how human behaviors almost invariably influence other human behaviors

Trump is going to Mexico tomorrow to meet with its president.

I'm not sure Trump and the Bannon braintrust has worked through every move on the chess board on this one. What happens if the Mexican president spends a few minutes pointing out how completely fucking idiotic the pledge to make Mexico pay for the wall is?

What could he possibly gain from going there?

I dunno.

My dear mother just texted me: "Do you think Trump is going to Mexico? Maybe he'll stay."

Wtf

What if Pena Nieto just says 'sure we'll build your wall'

Youseff wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:So monetary contributions to a politician can bias the politician in favor of the contributor. Did that author actually get paid to come up with that revelation?

do you agree with the implication that donations to the CF influenced decisions in the State Dept?

It doesn't appear to have affected much of anything.

It's probably to convince those college educated white women that he's not the racist they think he is. Look at me, I want to help the blacks and now the Mexicans.

Wild. Is he just dropping in. Does he know common courtesy would to have set this up a tad longer ago? He's so awful.

He accepted the invitation.

DSCC cancelled some ads in Ohio. Not good.