Trump won Florida in 2016, you have blue... Wisconsin too and Pennsylvania Wisconsin

He used a wishful thinking list from CNN.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...79931df610.jpg

Jacksonville's population is skewed by the fact that the entire County including the rural areas is within the city limits. Please choose one more representative of urban vs rural. I am quite curious.

I think what he means is that you probably want to break it down by counties. I think he's angling such that many of the larger cities are bluer and to run the data again.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmxpeeSX0AAiHA1.jpg




https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net...4a&oe=5DA6FD74

Ok, so I really did screw up the dataset from the 2016 election. Now I've fixed the graphic:


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...c9dfa27dda.png
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...b7c35f769a.png
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...5b5c7a7710.png

It pushes the balance in the Top 20 (more likely to be a sex offender) further into Red territory, and still leaves a lot more Blue than Red in the non-rapey section at the bottom of the chart.

So, the TL;DR is that any assertion that liberals are overwhelmingly more likely than conservatives to be child-sex-abusers (see post 15113 in this thread) is clearly false. If anything, it seems that the reverse is slightly more likely.

This can be said of pretty much all of the larger cities in red states. But I think I have a solution for your "Please choose one more representative of urban vs rural" request. See below.



My overall point in this is that liberals tend to be sex offenders at slightly lower rates than conservatives, which contradicts Brainack's earlier assertion that liberals tend to be child-rapists.

Your above "larger cities are bluer" supports my assertion, given that I'm proving larger cities have lower rates of sex offenders than small rural towns.

But...


https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...cd6d511c2d.png


Good question, Black Hat. Let's do that.


New York City is the most populous and densest city in the US, by far. Its DMA does not contain any suburban areas. In fact, the city itself occupies five separate (and geographically quite small) counties, mostly in their entirety.

It is also quite liberal.

NYC clocks in at 2,067 citizens per sex offender. The percentage of sex offenders in NYC is less than half the state average, which is 981 citizens per offender.


A few hours north by train (it really is a very soothing ride on the Amtrak Empire Line, and one which I've made many times), and you start to get into the Hudson valley, which is a blend of suburban (around Poughkeepsie) and downright rural. Like, actual family farms. Apple orchards are popular.

One area that I'm especially familiar with is the Catskill / Hudson neighborhood, as Nichole used to live there and I spent quite a lot of time there. Catskill and Hudson are two small towns on either side of the Hudson river, and are on the edge of what might be considered a suburb of Albany. It's about a 40 minute drive.

It's actually a very picturesque part of the state. Lots of hiking trails and waterfalls and old barns and deer and covered wooden bridges and whatnot.

Also lots of pedophiles.

Specifically, the citizen/sex-offender ratio in Catskill is 207:1, and just across the Rip Van Winkle Bridge in Hudson, it's nearly the same at 212:1. Roughly 5x higher than the state-wide average.



So, is this good enough? If we posit that big cities in red states tend to be bluer, and I can demonstrate that those big cities have lower rates of sex offense than out in poorer rural areas, and we've already seen that blue states, as a broad generalization, tend to skew towards lower levels of sex crime than red states, is that enough to debunk Braineack's assertion vis-a-vis:




Because, whether you agree with someone's political views or not (and, for the most part, I don't agree with the political views of most self-described liberals), trying to frame liberals as being unusually prone to pedophilia does not in any way help the political discourse, mostly because it's just so demonstrably and embarrassingly false. And it makes you seem as desperate for some criticism to latch onto as the "Orange Man Bad" crowd.

And that does a major disservice to all of us who consider ourselves to be in the right-thinking camp.

if all republicans are nazis, all liberals are pedophiles.

Neither of those are true.

Some people believe that they are.

This is why we can't have nice discourse.

https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net...b4&oe=5DE9FDE8

Imagine if white people walked around in mobs and attacked black people...




these kids deserve a nobel peace prize.

Joe, you no longer have to live in fear:

Man dies after he's accidentally shot by own passenger in 'drive-by gone bad' - Story | WFLD

Hahaha. Amateur. The instant I saw that headline, I immediately knew that had to be a south-side article. Was not disappointed.

CNN reporter vs. irony
 

Diversity is our strength:

This seems... problematic:

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...79b6edc96d.png









Just kidding, I photoshopped that. This is the unaltered original:

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...b5f7bf1118.png



I mean, can you imagine if the first photo was the real one? There'd be riots.

It was obviously faked. Children from the hard streets of Chicago are learned from the womb: snitches get stitches and/or wind up in ditches

'the criminal justice system is very racist in London:

https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-...OX51gViv9iO6J4