How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Days
He used the constitution to shatter the constitution.

By Timothy W. Ryback

the most popular article on the atlantic is this..



i wonder as to why that article as any kind of relevance..ohh.

Fascinating read about how we keep getting further and further away from each other...not a political article

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... tlantic+AM

And I don't know if the Atlantic is a lame stream media...I don't care...but this is included for context

Social disconnection also helps explain progressives’ stubborn inability to understand Trump’s appeal. In the fall, one popular Democratic lawn sign read HARRIS WALZ: OBVIOUSLY. That sentiment, rejected by a majority of voters, indicates a failure to engage with the world as it really is. Dunkelman emailed me after the election to lament Democratic cluelessness. “How did those of us who live in elite circles not see how Trump was gaining popularity even among our literal neighbors?” he wrote. Too many progressives were mainlining left-wing media in the privacy of their home, oblivious that families down the street were drifting right. Even in the highly progressive borough of Brooklyn, New York, three in 10 voters chose Trump. If progressives still consider MAGA an alien movement, it is in part because they have made themselves strangers in their own land.

I encourage you to read the article

An interesting article. Of course, as always, a snowflake like Claw immediately makes it political.

You are the one that made it political. Claw simply made valid points about an article. Sorry if it triggered you.

Find it fascinating that one would find a critical examination of an articles sourcing would be considered snowflake and political, quite a tell on that posters lack of intellectual capital.

It really is quite the opposite, but a real discussion would involve a dissection of the methodology involved in the formulation of the study cited. That would require a basic understanding of research methods, or even an ability to read abstracts and use basic tools to look at the research cited within the article.

Not really snowflaky, more of basic intellectual curiosity, a snowflake would just run and hide, but delving into the article could provide one with new insight.

If you are as smart as you say you are, what is one million times one million?

He's a man's man's nurse.

I would imagine there are unlimited chances for a straight male nurse to get laid.

With an man-sized sense of pretension. He's fantastic.

Sadly, Claw won't be able to share any stories about that.

He's a man's man's nurse.

Nope, you have to be careful what you say and do when you work around women. Have seen numerous dudes get into trouble trying to play where they work.

The Claw is of course a keen observer of the human condition, can tell you that if a young guy starts dating one of the young ladies he might as well date them all as they will all know everything about him, women tend to overshare, it is something you learn when you have daughters.

C'mon bro you don't have to be smart to understand basic research methodologies, not difficult to understand, now it gets a bit tricky as you get into specific STEM content, but type type of stuff discussed in the article we are posting about is not STEM content.

It was just a question.

And just an article.

I certainly have the intellectual capital to understand the acronym (I am more familiar with the concept as it relates to education and coursework). How it applied to whatever you were saying didn't make sense to me. That is all.

A reading from Claw's first Letter to the Corinthians (4:9-14).

9 Do not feel bad, brothers and sisters. I have easily dismissed numerous articles cited 10 as gospel on the board over the years. The review of sources sometimes teaches one quite a bit about the subject. 11 Academic types rely on the fact that most people will not do this type of inquiry 12 and that the research will simply be accepted at face value, 13 that does not work if you apply a bit of critical thought to the subject.

14 Besides, love is patient, love is kind.
It is not jealous, but it's ok sometimes if it is pompous and doesn't really say anything.

The Word of the Lord.

A bit cold outside but will get the crayola stater crayon pack and see if I can explain it to you.

There is an immense difference between the STEM buildings on campus and the junk science type you get out of the departments that do the type of research cited in the aforementioned article.

Research articles more than five years old are seen as unacceptable for most of the medical research we do and quite frankly, the level of abstraction built into the questions the "researcher" used in the survey questions would be laughed at and never make it past the initial study development stage.

When you are looking at STEM research you are looking for peer reviewed articles from reputable sources.

Hence the difference between the study that initiated this discussion and STEM type articles.

A bit heady for this board, but a very basic breakdown of how once much consider research. Any study cited is easily found via google search, a quick review of the abstract, and then a review of the studies framework will give you valid information to the studies validity.

Do not feel bad, have easily dismissed numerous articles cited as gospel on the board over the years. The review of sources sometimes teaches one quite a bit about the subject. Academic types rely on the fact that most people will not do this type of inquiry and that the research will simply be accepted at face value, that does not work if you apply a bit of critical thought to the subject.