Author Topic: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:  (Read 660 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 877
  • -Received: 1113
  • Posts: 2348
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
Pro-Publica is generally considered a non-partisan website, perhaps slightly left leaning.


https://www.allsides.com/news-source/propublica


Just for giggles - input any House member and compare them to another:

Example:

https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/P000618-katie-porter/compare-votes/O000172-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/116

Did you know Katie Porter votes identically with AOC roughly 92% of the time

How about Katie Porter and Nancy Pelosi.....?  How about Harley Rouda and AOC?

Here's the link for the Senate.

https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/F000062-dianne-feinstein/compare-votes/C001098-ted-cruz/116

Fun times....
My .02c

SGIP

Offline paperboyNC

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 346
  • -Received: 266
  • Posts: 1618
  • Gender: Male
  • Portola Springs
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2020, 01:09:20 PM »
Fun times....

Agreed. Fun times when people like you that are otherwise fairly rational are diehard supporters of a president who has lied over 20,000 times. But as long as you agree with the pathological liar, it's all good, right? I'm not a Democrat or Republican as I've swung back and forth between elections, but even I can see that Trump is the worst president of all time. If we had rational voters, he'd lose 95% to 1%

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline morekaos

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 501
  • -Received: 468
  • Posts: 4073
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2020, 01:14:10 PM »
Fun times....

Agreed. Fun times when people like you that are otherwise fairly rational are diehard supporters of a president who has lied over 20,000 times. But as long as you agree with the pathological liar, it's all good, right? I'm not a Democrat or Republican as I've swung back and forth between elections, but even I can see that Trump is the worst president of all time. If we had rational voters, he'd lose 95% to 1%

Just the accusation of the accusation is a lie....never ending hilarity and tail chasing...


No, Trump Hasn't Made 20,000 'False or Misleading' Claims

Indeed, per The Washington Post fact-checker database, President Trump has told 20,000 “false and misleading” claims through July 9 of this year – an astonishing average of nearly 16 false or misleading statements a day. Framed in those terms, Stelter has a point. Choosing between the credibility of Trump or, say, a CNN host, the editor of a prestige magazine such as The Atlantic, let alone a Washington Post fact-checker, is no choice at all.

The problem is that any cursory inspection of the Post database reveals that the idea that Trump has told 20,000 “false or misleading” statements is itself false and misleading. Vast quantities of the 20,000 are redundancies – statements, however tendentious, that Trump has repeated ad nauseum. More problematic is that thousands of statements The Washington Post labels as untrue or misleading are more properly considered the habitual verbal excess for a man known for his immoderate form of communication. Further, a great many of the Post’s objections to Trump’s statements amount to argumentative quibbles that aren’t really “fact checks.”

Just to start, here’s one of Trump’s most oft-repeated “lies,” according to Washington Post fact checkers: “My job was made harder by phony witch hunts, by ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ nonsense.” The Post dings Trump for some variation of this claim 227 times – more than 1% of Trump’s alleged untruths. Yet, the Post’s justification for why Trump is wrong to say this is pure pettifogging.

Much of it essentially consists of a defense of the probe conducted by special prosecutor Robert Mueller. However, the most tangible results from the Mueller investigation – criminal charges for Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort for unrelated work in Ukraine and fecklessly charging (and then quietly dropping the charges) against a bunch of Russian nationals for hacking and other dirty computer tricks – don’t come close to proving Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/09/10/no_trump_hasnt_made_20000_false_or_misleading_claims.html


Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 877
  • -Received: 1113
  • Posts: 2348
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2020, 01:14:23 PM »
Weird how a discussion of House and Senate members turns to a POTUS discussion.  Let's leave that for the pre-existing threads.



It's interesting to see how Orange County values - as reflected by our elected officials - have shifted to mirror those of San Francisco and New York City.

My guess is that if this comparison was broadly advertised people might wonder why the AOC of OC is our currently elected representative. 
My .02c

SGIP

Offline paperboyNC

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 346
  • -Received: 266
  • Posts: 1618
  • Gender: Male
  • Portola Springs
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2020, 01:18:23 PM »
Fun times....

Agreed. Fun times when people like you that are otherwise fairly rational are diehard supporters of a president who has lied over 20,000 times. But as long as you agree with the pathological liar, it's all good, right? I'm not a Democrat or Republican as I've swung back and forth between elections, but even I can see that Trump is the worst president of all time. If we had rational voters, he'd lose 95% to 1%

Just the accusation of the accusation is a lie....never ending hilarity and tail chasing...


No, Trump Hasn't Made 20,000 'False or Misleading' Claims

Indeed, per The Washington Post fact-checker database, President Trump has told 20,000 “false and misleading” claims through July 9 of this year – an astonishing average of nearly 16 false or misleading statements a day. Framed in those terms, Stelter has a point. Choosing between the credibility of Trump or, say, a CNN host, the editor of a prestige magazine such as The Atlantic, let alone a Washington Post fact-checker, is no choice at all.

The problem is that any cursory inspection of the Post database reveals that the idea that Trump has told 20,000 “false or misleading” statements is itself false and misleading. Vast quantities of the 20,000 are redundancies – statements, however tendentious, that Trump has repeated ad nauseum. More problematic is that thousands of statements The Washington Post labels as untrue or misleading are more properly considered the habitual verbal excess for a man known for his immoderate form of communication. Further, a great many of the Post’s objections to Trump’s statements amount to argumentative quibbles that aren’t really “fact checks.”

Just to start, here’s one of Trump’s most oft-repeated “lies,” according to Washington Post fact checkers: “My job was made harder by phony witch hunts, by ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ nonsense.” The Post dings Trump for some variation of this claim 227 times – more than 1% of Trump’s alleged untruths. Yet, the Post’s justification for why Trump is wrong to say this is pure pettifogging.

Much of it essentially consists of a defense of the probe conducted by special prosecutor Robert Mueller. However, the most tangible results from the Mueller investigation – criminal charges for Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort for unrelated work in Ukraine and fecklessly charging (and then quietly dropping the charges) against a bunch of Russian nationals for hacking and other dirty computer tricks – don’t come close to proving Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/09/10/no_trump_hasnt_made_20000_false_or_misleading_claims.html


Since you are focused on disputing the number, how many times do you think Trump has lied? Do you think it's too many, too few or just enough?

Offline paperboyNC

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 346
  • -Received: 266
  • Posts: 1618
  • Gender: Male
  • Portola Springs
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2020, 01:27:34 PM »
Weird how a discussion of House and Senate members turns to a POTUS discussion.  Let's leave that for the pre-existing threads.



It's interesting to see how Orange County values - as reflected by our elected officials - have shifted to mirror those of San Francisco and New York City.

My guess is that if this comparison was broadly advertised people might wonder why the AOC of OC is our currently elected representative.

Matching voting records doesn't as much as you think since most legislation brought to the floor is not extreme. You are grasping at straws. Kevin McCarthy voted with AOC a good chunk of the time as well.

And yes it's about Trump. If you diehard Republicans were willing to publicly stand up to Trump, he would no longer be the president. I would have seriously considered voting Republican this election if the Party disavowed lying constantly.

I decided I am not going to vote for any Republican for any office until the stain of Trump is wiped from the party. So yes - this election to me is all about Trump, not about Katie Porter.

Instead of looking at matching voting records, why don't you dig deeper into bills that Katie Porter has proposed or co-sponsored?



Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 877
  • -Received: 1113
  • Posts: 2348
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #6 on: October 12, 2020, 02:12:00 PM »
Ask, and you shall receive....

Lots of nothing.  https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/P000618-katie-porter/bills-sponsored/116 The one bill that made it to the Senate was to get the Government to pay for legislators child care as they run for office. Important stuff.

Harley Rouda's done even less:https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/R000616-harley-rouda/bills-sponsored/116 He couldn't even get a bill passed on to the Senate acknowledging the 60th anniversary of the US Open Of Surfing. https://projects.propublica.org/represent/bills/116/hres534 

Compare their records with another 2018 freshman - Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas). https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/C001120-dan-crenshaw/bills-sponsored/116

He's had fewer bills sponsored (15) but a higher number submitted to the Senate (4)
Rouda has had more sponsored (26) but how many to the Senate? How does zero sound (0)
Porter submitted the most (34) but has only had one sent to the Senate (1)

In Baseball terms, that's .266 for Crenshaw, 0.000 for Rouda, and 0.029 for Porter.

Can't really say we're getting our money's worth out of the current crop of freshmen legislators.

But TRUMP!

My .02c

SGIP

Offline paperboyNC

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 346
  • -Received: 266
  • Posts: 1618
  • Gender: Male
  • Portola Springs
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #7 on: October 12, 2020, 02:29:26 PM »
Ask, and you shall receive....

Lots of nothing.  https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/P000618-katie-porter/bills-sponsored/116 The one bill that made it to the Senate was to get the Government to pay for legislators child care as they run for office. Important stuff.

Harley Rouda's done even less:https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/R000616-harley-rouda/bills-sponsored/116 He couldn't even get a bill passed on to the Senate acknowledging the 60th anniversary of the US Open Of Surfing. https://projects.propublica.org/represent/bills/116/hres534 

Compare their records with another 2018 freshman - Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas). https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/C001120-dan-crenshaw/bills-sponsored/116

He's had fewer bills sponsored (15) but a higher number submitted to the Senate (4)
Rouda has had more sponsored (26) but how many to the Senate? How does zero sound (0)
Porter submitted the most (34) but has only had one sent to the Senate (1)

In Baseball terms, that's .266 for Crenshaw, 0.000 for Rouda, and 0.029 for Porter.

Can't really say we're getting our money's worth out of the current crop of freshmen legislators.

But TRUMP!

Anyone can cherry pick. Kevin Mccarthy's big successful big is.. wait for it..
https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/M001165-kevin-mccarthy/bills-sponsored/116

H.R.2695: To rename the Success Dam in Tulare County, California, as the Richard L. Schafer Dam.

And you still have no defense for Trump's pathological lying. How much lying is acceptable for POTUS? If not 16 a day, what are we good with, 6 a day and 50 on Sundays?

Offline morekaos

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 501
  • -Received: 468
  • Posts: 4073
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2020, 02:50:27 PM »
You assume I think some don’t lie. I’ve stated it many times...I think they all lie, so how much is too much? Doesn’t matter. Pretty well anything coming out of any politicians mouth is a lie. My guys just lie the way I like. ;D ;D :D >:D

Offline paperboyNC

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 346
  • -Received: 266
  • Posts: 1618
  • Gender: Male
  • Portola Springs
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2020, 02:55:54 PM »
Pretty well anything coming out of any politicians mouth is a lie.
Keep telling yourself that. It's difficult to have a rational discussion with people that think that Trump's pathological lying is the same as every politician.

Offline morekaos

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 501
  • -Received: 468
  • Posts: 4073
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2020, 03:08:54 PM »
The playing field is even.  You really believe the things that come out of your politicians mouths?  My point is they all lie, mine included. If you really believe in the nobility and honesty of Democrats over republicans or visa versa you’re naive.

Offline HMart

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 179
  • -Received: 55
  • Posts: 411
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2020, 03:13:53 PM »
It's interesting to see how Orange County values - as reflected by our elected officials - have shifted to mirror those of San Francisco and New York City.

I definitely think Irvine / OC is getting more and more cosmopolitan and diverse. I feel like I have more in common with people from SF/NYC than I do with people from Bakersfield (to use an example of Kevin McCarthy's constituency). Then again, I'm under the age of 40 and am in an industry that is heavily into research and technology.

The following member(s) thanked this post:


Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 877
  • -Received: 1113
  • Posts: 2348
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2020, 03:17:28 PM »
@PaperboyNC

I'd be happy to answer you about the Tang Menace - in a pre-existing thread, one that deals with that subject. The world does not revolve around what the Donald does or does not do about things like Mello Roos in the Great Park, which bubble tea is best, or why the OC Register is an unreadable rag now. As some on the site (not @PaperboyNC) prefer to talk about the Cheeto Hitler in each and every thread on the site, that's their prerogative, but it does bore the heck out of everyone else.

Back to the thread at hand - There are countless losers in The House of Representatives to compare with each other. That's the interesting thing about that site. The problem being is that the losers we have here in OC aren't representing their districts interests and getting little, if anything worthwhile done. That's their undeniable record - not what I'm saying, but what can be seen by anyone. If you're willing to accept that from these representatives, by all means vote to return the incumbent. 

My .02c
« Last Edit: October 12, 2020, 05:31:08 PM by Soylent Green Is People »
My .02c

SGIP

Offline Soylent Green Is People

  • Abiding Dude. Housing focused NMLS Licensed
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 877
  • -Received: 1113
  • Posts: 2348
  • Gender: Male
  • Isaiah 58: 6-11
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2020, 03:19:17 PM »
Thanks @HMart for a reasonable, on topic post.
My .02c

SGIP

Offline paperboyNC

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 346
  • -Received: 266
  • Posts: 1618
  • Gender: Male
  • Portola Springs
Re: An interesting AND non-partisan website regarding voting records:
« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2020, 03:29:11 PM »
@PaperboyNC

I'd be happy to answer you about the Tang Menace - in a pre-existing thread, one that deals with that subject. The world does not revolve around what the Donald does or does not do about things like Mello Roos in the Great Park, which bubble tea is best, or why the OC Register is an unreadable rag now. If you prefer to talk about the Cheeto Hitler in each and every thread on the site, that's your prerogative, but it does bore the heck out of everyone.

Back to the thread at hand - There are countless losers in The House of Representatives to compare with each other. That's the interesting thing about that site. The problem being is that the losers we have here in OC aren't representing their districts interests and getting little, if anything worthwhile done. That's their undeniable record - not what I'm saying, but what can be seen by anyone. If you're willing to accept that from these representatives, by all means vote to return the incumbent. 

My .02c

Proof that I post about Trump on each and every thread on the site?

You think Mimi Walters represented our district by pushing for and voting for caps on the SALT deductions?

You are calling Katie Porter names and trying to state it as facts. Not sure why you can't speak rationally about your own topic.

 

Talk Irvine Links

[Recent Posts]
[FAQ / Rules]

Site Supporters


SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2020, SimplePortal