J.C.MacSwell

I am more than a little skeptical of this claim. I am certainly not an expert in evolution or biology, but I find it hard to believe we acquired this as late in our evolution as this would suggest.

Agree... and pretty damning on it's own. Why CNN feels the need to take it so much further amazes me. The example I gave of Cuomo describing what Trump was thinking loses Cuomo and CNN credibility.If reacting like that is because Trump calls them "fake News" it is more than a little ironic. Thank you and likewise. I believe the vast majority of Americans are, and deserve political options much closer to the centre, more moderate, and a much more civil discourse where this same vast majority gets respected. I think this requires new leadership on both sides...or a third option.

Where? Where did I even imply that it might be? Trump is worse than CNN...and much of it is toward CNN. That might explain some of the CNN bias against Trump. It does not mean that CNN is free of bias. I see you are keeping up with your previous assumptions. Did you re-read the posts? Feel free to quote me, instead of telling me what you think I meant. Is it unfair to think that this is how the Democrats have close elections against a party lead by Trump? (I realize Republicans do it to...but why are you doing it? If you think I am wrong quote what I said, and stop with what Ten oz implied that I said)

You did though. You assumed my equivalent was in all the same respects. I have clarified my position. Why would I retract it? Why do I need to provide more evidence of CNN being anti-Trump? Both you and Ten oz seem to agree with it. That is the most notable component in CNN's bias. I have readily admitted that without it they don't hold the same level of bias as Fox (read my posts). I clarified, I did not change my position. I will give you a recent example of CNN's politically correct/left wing over reach : https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/25/opinions/megyn-kelly-blackface-comments-racism-roxanne-jones/index.html Well let me clarify it again. THAT WAS NOT MY CLAIM... you claimed you weren't making assumptions...yet you bought that from Ten oz. Read my posts...

If you want examples of CNN pro Democrat equivalence to what Fox is doing pro GOP, I don't think you will find them. CNN being pro Democrat is somewhat more subtle, but when the anti-Trump extreme rhetoric is included, it rises to the same level (IMO, and I think I have more reasons to be less biased than some here, neither being pro Democrat or Republican and certainly anti-Trump) ...and no, I don't think all anti Trump rhetoric is pro Democrat, or anti GOP, but enough I believe that my point stands, (Is "Little GOP Bastard Kills Beloved Family Pet!" pro Democrat?) So...Are you looking for examples of pro left, pro democrat, or anti right, anti GOP? (seeing there seems to be agreement CNN is extremely anti-Trump) If anti-Trump holds no weight whatsoever (it does though, does it not?), CNN is no doubt more neutral than Fox, and clearly make a mild attempt to be more subtle about it, but is it not clear to you they are much more aligned with the Democrats on most issues? Was this not clear to you during the Kavanaugh hearings? Do you feel they were neutral? (honest question) I don't really have the stomach to dig up gun control examples (I'm for gun control) , and not believing in climate change is pretty dumb, I've expressed views in another thread wrt voter disenfranchisement, but considering Kavanaugh turned into an emotional debate for some here...what type of example are you after? If I give an example are you going to assume I have taken a side on it? As much as I've enjoyed hearing views different from mine I get tired of some of the assumptions on mine.

That would be incorrect.

Just for the record, do you think CNN is not pro Democrat? (currently)

I think you are hitting pretty strong in the false equivalency department.

Not that I can confirm anything in your post with regard to Fox News but I don't really have any reason to doubt what you say. I think we can probably agree on how bad Fox News is. They seem like they are actively campaigning for Trump and the GOP. I have only watched them recently, and they are horrible. (though sometimes entertaining) I don't remember CNN being near as bad until recently. They are every bit as bad. They constantly overstate their case against Trump...not sure why they feel it is necessary. I will give you an example... The buffoon is receiving Kanye West at the oval office: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/10/12/cnn_cuomo_trump_looked_like_he_had_racist_thoughts_talking_to_kanye_west.html If their was anything dumber than Trump receiving West in the first place it is Cuomo's rant describing what he thought Trump was thinking. CNN aired this. Show me the equivalent of that for Fox News...

I don't remember CNN being near as bad as it is now 2 years ago. In my mind it is not a false equivalency to say they are similar in degree of bias to Fox News.

Two boys are playing in a park in a very Democrat neighbourhood, when one is attacked by a rabid Rottweiler. Thinking quickly, the other boy takes his stick, wedges it down the dogs collar and twists,breaking the dogs neck. A CNN reporter who was strolling by sees the incident,and rushes over to interview the boy. "Young Democrat Saves Friend From Vicious Animal," he starts writing in his notebook. "But I'm not a Democrat" the little hero replied. "Sorry, since we are in this area, I just assumed you were into politics." said the reporter and starts again. "Young Boy Rescues Friend From Horrific Attack" he continued writing in his notebook. "But I am into politics, I'm a Republican." the boy said. The reporter starts a new sheet in his notebook and writes, "Little GOP Bastard Kills Beloved Family Pet!" (adapted from http://forums.habsworld.net/index.php?/topic/6048-some-good-ole-leaf-jokes/) Interchange Republican/Democrat and Fox News/CNN to suit and you have the state of politics and news in the U.S. right now.

I doubt they get "crushed", but if they do it is probably more from shooting themselves in the foot than Trump shooting his mouth off.

Voting is more than just an individual right. It is not intended exclusively for self interest (part of the reason we have constitutional democracy, not just majority rule). When you disenfranchise someone by taking away their voting right it is a very small part of their overall punishment, but the accumulation of this disenfranchisement is, or most certainly can be, punishing a group that extends to be much greater than the incarcerated themselves.

I take it you don't like them. (fair enough) What about other violent crimes? Crimes that are emotionally equivalent? The point is that you have to draw the line somewhere, arbitrarily, if you draw it anywhere...and you can get to where it is in Florida (as Ten oz pointed out above) with over 10% of otherwise eligible voters not allowed to take part in the voting for the making and maintaining of laws they are expected to respect.

My thoughts are that their votes are not going to influence whether murder or rape should be legal, and likely not influence very much at all with respect to those crimes...so why not let them vote along with all the other less than perfect voters (i.e. everyone else)? As long as they understand what is asked, I don't see what harm there is in having all felons vote on a national or provincial/state election (other than the argument that they might vote for the wrong party...!). I think it is less dangerous than deciding who should/should not vote. Imagine a time of protest and civil disobedience where you could disenfranchise every felon...at what point will it not even be able to pretend to be democratic?

I think it also sends the wrong message. If the system does not respect them, why should we feel they should respect the system?

Just to add to that. They vote in the constituency they were in prior to being incarcerated. edit: "vote in" meaning counted toward

That is one nasty statistic!

I would be inclined to say that every citizen should be allowed to vote, felon or not, though I can see concerns about what region their vote is counted in. If, say, they were incarcerated in one region after life in another, or others, where should their vote be competed for and count toward? Allowing inmates of a penitentiary attached to a small town being allowed to vote for town council could amount to "inmates running the asylum", but OTOH why should they not vote nationally? If there are enough felons (or those of violent crimes) to effect the vote, maybe the reasons should be given more focus.

I am going to go with yes. I gave a mosquito a near death experience once (it, along with the mosquito, was short lived, but it was near death at one point no doubt). So I can only conclude mosquitos have an afterlife as well...if we do...

I found this on Google... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question

Agree with this. Another option if you really can't do that is to spoil your ballot. I think that is a much stronger statement than (seemingly) not bothering to go out and vote.

In terms of votes? I think the effect of outside interference might only have been significant in very close races. "Other misinformation"...probably a more significant effect that would go both ways, for and against both Clinton and Trump...an effect that seems to have been ramped up for candidates in this coming mid terms.

A "quality candidate" should have not just won the popular vote by the "millions" she did. Trump should not have been anywhere in the same ballpark. How many votes did she get simply from being considered a bad choice that was not as bad as the alternative? She was not a "popular" choice.

Other than geographically, vote counting cannot get broken down by demographic.