America's worst run cities vs how many years since they had a Republican mayor

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,378]

@charliekirk11

 

America's worst run cities vs how many years since they had a Republican mayor:

D.C.—109

Detroit—57

NYC—12

San Francisco—55

Oakland—58

Flint, MI—44

Cleveland—30

Hartford, CT—48

Chicago—88

Los Angeles—18

Atlanta—140

St. Louis—70

Philadelphia—67

See a correlation?

🤔

[Dashinka 24,747]

27 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

@charliekirk11

 

America's worst run cities vs how many years since they had a Republican mayor:

D.C.—109

Detroit—57

NYC—12

San Francisco—55

Oakland—58

Flint, MI—44

Cleveland—30

Hartford, CT—48

Chicago—88

Los Angeles—18

Atlanta—140

St. Louis—70

Philadelphia—67

See a correlation?

🤔

Deaf ears of course.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

33 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

@charliekirk11

 

America's worst run cities vs how many years since they had a Republican mayor:

D.C.—109

Detroit—57

NYC—12

San Francisco—55

Oakland—58

Flint, MI—44

Cleveland—30

Hartford, CT—48

Chicago—88

Los Angeles—18

Atlanta—140

St. Louis—70

Philadelphia—67

See a correlation?

🤔

 

   Yeah, there seems to be an inverse correlation between claiming to be middle of the road and what people actually post.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

13 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Yeah, there seems to be an inverse correlation between claiming to be middle of the road and what people actually post.

One can indeed be a member of the MOR and yet see the disparity on both sides.

Or were you trying to say the OP is inaccurate?

[Dashinka 24,747]

9 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

One can indeed be a member of the MOR and yet see the disparity on both sides.

Or were you trying to say the OP is inaccurate?

Kind of the difference between a classic liberal and what is today’s Leftist Democrats.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

One can indeed be a member of the MOR and yet see the disparity on both sides.

Or were you trying to say the OP is inaccurate?

 

  It's implying that causation is correlation. We all know that's a common fallacy of logic, and it's not different in this case. Many of the best cities to live in also have Democratic mayors. The actual correlation is that large cities have a tendency towards electing Democrat mayors. 

 

  Anyway hopefully not too many people fell for this informative but dubious tweet. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

8 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  It's implying that causation is correlation. We all know that's a common fallacy of logic, and it's not different in this case. Many of the best cities to live in also have Democratic mayors. The actual correlation is that large cities have a tendency towards electing Democrat mayors. 

 

  Anyway hopefully not too many people fell for this informative but dubious tweet. 

I doubt anyone “fell” for it.  It’s been fact for many years.  I myself have posted similar stats in various discussions.  It’s fact enough that I personally avoid moving to any of the cities listed (and a few not on this list).  

But yes, there are some (D) cities that are good to live in, though they tend to be smaller.  Perhaps a stronger argument would be made by saying “cities that are large and liberal” are worse off.  The more they gather, the worse things become, potentially.

[yuna628 9,700]

DC is not terrible to live in, unless Charlie is just lumping us Baltimoreans in with the lot. Then again I doubt Charlie has lived or genuinely cares about the people in any of these places. I would argue if we are going to follow his logic, I hope he takes a look at some poverty stricken towns in some poverty stricken red states...

 

 

Edited October 27, 2019 by yuna628

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

DC is not terrible to live in, unless Charlie is just lumping us Baltimoreans in with the lot. Then again I doubt Charlie has lived or genuinely cares about the people in any of these places. I would argue if we are going to follow his logic, I hope he takes a look at some poverty stricken towns in some poverty stricken red states...

DC used to be VERY dangerous.  I concede that it has gotten better, but still not a place I would want to take my family to live.

[yuna628 9,700]

9 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

DC used to be VERY dangerous.  I concede that it has gotten better, but still not a place I would want to take my family to live.

Honestly? I felt safer in DC than Baltimore, and that being said I used to live in some of the more dangerous spots of Baltimore, and still have had to frequent that area, and not been harmed. NYC also used to be very dangerous in the old days, significant improvements. I will concede that some parts of NJ and Philly are very bad imo. I just spent the evening walking through a pretty big inner city in a blue state. Tons of people about as it's homecoming. There were some homeless begging but everyone was polite. Felt very safe. Then I come home, back to my red state town, following behind a clearly impaired driver, people turning tricks on the corner, a couple of drug deals, and a message on our community watch page about a gang of dudes trying to break into homes in our development. Not sure if you've been to DC lately, but there are some areas that have been revitalized... I *wish* some areas of Baltimore could be like that.

Edited October 27, 2019 by yuna628

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

I have never been to Baltimore, but I'll take your word for it.  DC... it's been a couple of years, but I stayed in a nice area, and didn't venture out at night. 

 

Currently in SFO.  I feel.safe, but the smell.of urine on the streets, and the smells of unwashed homeless people really.take away from the beauty of the city.