Nope. Those common people wouldn't support someone who invites foreign hostile leaders to hack in and steal documents from Americans. Those common people wouldn't support a ban on Muslim immigrants. The list goes on and on.
Spoiler <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Oh, rats. (<a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump">@realDonaldTrump</a>) <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MakeAmericaSpellAgain?src=hash">#MakeAmericaSpellAgain</a> <a href="https://t.co/bbe0kbLZ1m">pic.twitter.com/bbe0kbLZ1m</a></p>— Freezing Cold Takes (@OldTakesExposed) <a href="https://twitter.com/OldTakesExposed/status/759214195036520448">July 30, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Though, nothing is wrong with "judgement"
You almost got it. I'm a Chinese Canadian guy who did his undergrad in a STEM field and is currently pursuing a career in medicine. My parents and I immigrated to the West Coast at the turn of the millennium with a grand total of 2000 CAD in our pockets. And yes I did want to get something off of my chest. It's called freedom of speech. I think listening is a vital part of a debate. Otherwise you're just there to hear yourself talk.
You make claims such as us 'ignoring' claims about statistics of Islam in the States? Can you provide these statistics? Like the percentage of Muslim Americans with a degree relative to other demographics or crime rate if Muslim Americans. You have this gut feeling that the media has a biased agenda against Trump yet a large majority of this 'negative publicity' is just simply playback of his speeches. What he states is so absurd and removed from the truth, that no commentary is necessary. I mean, Trump has to be the first presidential candidate to openly ask a foreign state to purposefuly hack American servers.
Residency, pre-med, or MS year? Have a hard time believing any of my peers would support a dumbass. Medicine requires placing judgement in empirical evidence and rational thought---something Trump is the antithesis of.
Medicine requires only memorization unlike us god like engineering majors with our supurior analytical skills :grin: I'm being sarcastic just to be clear...
MS-3. All I have been doing on these boards is provide empirical evidence and rational thought. Just because we are in the same field does not mean we ought to think alike and believe in the same things. For my own life I believe in first do no harm, and the four pillars of ethics. Justice and autonomy is at play here. One second while I respond to the other reply to me and you will see, at least with respect to Islam, that those two are trampled upon- Based on statistica evidence.
You didn't answer my question. What empirical evidence do you have to fear American Muslims? A good place to start is finding a metric which finds the percentage of law abiding Muslim citizens and defence that to other groups or sub-demographics. Your poll of American Muslims doest really have a reference point does it? You are assuming that a question posed to evengical Christians such as 'Should Christianity be the law of the land?' isn't going to net a less flattering percentage. That's what we call conjecture. The statistics you provided regarding American Muslims would have more merit to your claim if there was a control group. You are in medicene right? You understand elementary concepts such as 'control group' I am to assume?
Also. I never said I supported Trump. Never. I have my own views. Some of them align with those of Trump. Do I think he's God? Do I agree with 100% of his sayings? No. So I suggest you start judging me by what I say. Not what you think I believe in. I suggest people who disagree attack my arguments. Attacking a person accomplishes nothing. I'm sleep deprived half the time so words like dumbass (or bigot, or sexist, or whatever brand of label one choses) flies straight over my head.
You don't fear that about one third American Muslims believe that Sharia should be the supreme law of the land? You don't fear that 1/5th of Muslims in U.S. approve of violence in order to institute sharia? You do realize that theoretically, crimes such as rapes are just as likely to happen in the US without proper screening of migrants. Do you think that a Muslim would-be rapist would not chose the US simply because it isn't Sweden or Norway?
Being an ex-Muslim who despises Islam AND has intimate knowledge of the Muslim community in TWO major US metros(Houston and Boston area), I can confidently tell you from my personal experience 1/5h of US Muslims don't give two ****s about Sharia law. But EVEN if you don't take my anecdote to heed, you still are simply attempting to appeal to emotion. "How can YOU NOT be afraid of 1/5th of US Muslims wanting Sharia!". That is simply an appeal to emotions simply because the 'empirical evidence' you are standing on has no reference point or 'control'. How do you know that less than 12 percent of Christians won't answer 'yes' to "Do you wish that America be ruled by Christian law?". I mean if you can find a poll that uses the same sampling methods that poses similar questions to American Christians that would be a great start on your part to defend your assertions. I mean, you would be surprised how stupid the American demographic can look like if you base it off random polls. Wasn't there a poll a few years back that suggests that more than 40 percent of Americans believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old? I just don't see in my day to day interactions where 40 percent of the people believe in something so asinine? Maybe because I currently live in a college town in Massachusetts?
First off, we're all sleep deprived---4hrs was my best night this week and it only gets worse from med. school. Complaining about it does you no good. Second, I didn't insult or attack you, I was talking about Trump being a dumbass devoid or rational decision making--something his own party has voiced concerns over. So naturally anybody looking to make it in a profession that requires the utmost tact and logical thought process, could never support a man that runs his mouth off like a baboon. That is what I was getting at. And I'm guessing you took Step-1 recently, so you don't have an excuse for throwing out "but stats". If I was your PI/attending and asked you to vet a study and present the findings to me you know damn well that the methodology, biases, context and paradigm matter. You won't ever get away with citing a "study" or "numbers" and presenting them as statistical evidence. There is bad research out there, some of it that borders on criminality.
To be fair to you supdudes, Samfisher was out of line for his "Hey everybody- noncollege white guy wants to get something off his chest." comment. That was uncalled for.
Again, as someone that should have at least a superficial understanding of biostatistics I don't understand how you can make egregious claims like that. Tell me of the study, how the data was collected, the structure , biases etc. Common sense alone should tell you that number is complete bull$hit. You should know this stuff already.
SamFisher is also an arrogant *******. And I say that knowing that our political views are pretty aligned.
Fair enough guys, My argument was simply this: Based on what stats I do have and the prevailing climate of terrorism around the world, we need stricter and more thorough background checks for migrants from the middle east, especially those who identify as following Islam. I agree, the specifics of the research method may or may not sound. I don't have any personal anecdotal evidence to back up what I am saying either. No problem. I simply don't have the energy to dig up the specifics of the method on those stats. I will bow out. I'm Canadian. We don't do Step 1.
List of key GOP saying "I'm with her" http://www.scnow.com/bh_media_news_service/article_2f1a504e-95bd-5d30-9705-f516d353e226.html
