English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If you look at a map of the US that is divided into Red and Blue based upon the outcome of recent elections, you will see that the cities with the highest crime rate are solid Blue. For example, Detroit, Washington DC, Baltimore, New Orleans, LA, NYC, and Chicago. It seems that Blue and Crime are synonymous. Doesn't this explain why Liberals are always trying to take hard working American's money through social spending that benefits the Blue population?

2007-10-12 13:47:57 · 15 answers · asked by plezurgui 6 in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

DEMOCRAT VOTERS HAVE THE DEMOCRAT COMMUNIST PARTY STANDING UP FOR CRIMINALS......NOTICE HOW HILLARY HIRED SANDY BERGER.....

2007-10-12 13:56:54 · answer #1 · answered by ? 3 · 4 3

Liberals vs the liberal social gathering in Canada could be somewhat the project we've large L liberals and small l liberals --- we've financial liberals we've social liberals financial conservatives that declare to be social liberals etc etc etc and then there are the human beings who basically call themselves liberals and whether their perspectives journey the social gathering line or not is a huge gamble at terrific There looks some know-how of this in Canada it relatively is lacking interior the U. S. the place human beings tend to be lumped by potential of the rigidity of media so lots extra advantageous than we seem to Plus we've a Provincial Liberal Conservative NDP social gathering that has little to not something to do different than a generic promise to not get in each and each others way The conservative social gathering is the two divided by potential of sub communities besides The NDP shows much less branch yet shall we basically wait and spot what happens to them could they ever grow to be Her Majesty's opposition or government and that i'm particular we can see divisions in political theory emerge there too The western conservative social gathering appeared very motive upon abolishing an appointed senate and that doesn't tend to sit down down nicely with the vote rich Ontario Quebec bloc that concurs on not something many of the time there is readily NO set social gathering LINE There are communities banded mutually attempting to sell you their view and those perspectives are truly changeable based upon the human beings defining and advertising that coverage occasion --- salary and value administration Stanfield vs Trudeau and overseas coverage in direction of Cuba So asserting "THE LIBERALS" The CONSERVATIVES etc is regarding comparable to asserting the chinese language and waiting for them to be a unified mass of homogenized opinion and values

2016-10-22 05:09:55 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

GOOD EVENING OR MORNING now plezurqu, Yep; take a look at Burger the dummy that took Secret Documents and destroyed some of them. Even President Bush did not raise any H___ over that one. This country is headed down hill at warp speed if we don't do something about it.

HAVE A WONDERFUL WEEK END,
Bulldog

2007-10-12 21:08:38 · answer #3 · answered by BULLDOG 4 · 1 0

Notice, that if you look at that same map, those areas that are blue are also the most economically valuable, are home to the best schools, have the highest average salaries, and are also the most ethnically diverse. So by that reasoning, Democratic states are the richest and smartest, and all minorities MUST be Liberals. You look for a pattern, you'll find one.

2007-10-12 14:14:16 · answer #4 · answered by Mary 2 · 2 3

No. Denial, deception, lying, and having brains that have been marinating in bleeding hearted liberal media rhetoric for too long are not crimes.

2007-10-12 13:55:45 · answer #5 · answered by dagiffy 3 · 2 3

well the term "liberal' by definition invokes notions of lack of order and general civil disobedience. if one is liberal, one allows more to come to pass with no retribution. liberals tend to allow moral depravity and crime with little or no reprisal. thus drawing more people to these places.

2007-10-12 13:56:18 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 5 3

by that same token... rural areas are known for meth labs and meth use... and they are solidly red...

so conservatives and Republicans are inherently meth taking drug addicts...

using your fantastic logic...

so, no... neither is true...

the criminal element in those cities are mostly among those in poverty... and those in poverty are the least likely to vote in any group...

a red or blue area that happens to have a certain problem doesn't really denote that that group inherently has that problem...

2007-10-12 13:55:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 4

Doesn't the red explain why the minority populations in "conservative" controlled areas are minimal -- since all conservatives are racist, sexist, bigots?

2007-10-12 14:20:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

not very good logic but you are on to something...

people tend to be more liberal (and democrats) when they have to live close to one another. republicans and people who tend to be more conservative live out in the country.

2007-10-12 14:17:50 · answer #9 · answered by bmw2002driver1971 2 · 1 3

It really doesnt have any relavance to political affiliation.....being poor is relevant to the crime rate....of course you already knew that

2007-10-12 13:53:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

Sure there is did not you feel the difference between Clinton and Bush?

What about recent vote on SCHIP?
numerous examples stop you BS!

2007-10-12 13:53:04 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 6

fedest.com, questions and answers