Leave it to Joe Biden to cause world war 3 🤦‍♀️

[DBP66]

How Russia and Right-Wing Americans Converged on War in Ukraine

 

 

Sheera Frenkel and Stuart A. Thompson

Wed, March 23, 2022, 1:55 PM

 

 

 

The Fox News host Tucker Carlson has echoed Russian claims that the invasion of Ukraine was taken in self-defense. He has also criticized Russia's president, Vladimir Putin. (Justin T. Gellerson/The New York Times)

After President Vladimir Putin of Russia claimed that action against Ukraine was taken in self-defense, Fox News host Tucker Carlson and conservative commentator Candace Owens repeated the assertion. When Putin insisted he was trying to “denazify” Ukraine, Joe Oltmann, a far-right podcaster, and Lara Logan, another right-wing commentator, mirrored the idea.

The echoing went the other way, too. Some far-right U.S. news sites, like Infowars, stoked a longtime, unfounded Russian claim that the United States funded biological weapons labs in Ukraine. Russian officials seized on the chatter, with the Kremlin contending it had documentation of bioweapons programs that justified its “special military operation” in Ukraine.

As war has raged, the Kremlin’s talking points and some right-wing discourse in the United States — fueled by those on the far right — have coalesced. On social media, podcasts and television, falsehoods about the invasion of Ukraine have flowed both ways, with Americans amplifying lies from Russians and the Kremlin spreading fabrications that festered in U.S. forums online.

By reinforcing and feeding each other’s messaging, some right-wing Americans have given credibility to Russia’s assertions and vice versa. Together, they have created an alternate reality, recasting the Western bloc of allies as provokers, blunderers and liars, which has bolstered Putin.

The war initially threw some conservatives — who had insisted no invasion would happen — for a loop. Many criticized Putin and Russia’s assault on Ukraine. Some have since gone on to urge more support for Ukraine.

But in recent days, several far-right commentators have again gravitated to narratives favorable to Putin’s cause. The main one has been the bioweapons conspiracy theory, which has provided a way to talk about the war while focusing criticism on President Joe Biden and the U.S. government instead of Putin and the Kremlin.

“People are asking if the far right in the U.S. is influencing Russia or if Russia is influencing the far right, but the truth is they are influencing each other,” said Thomas Rid, a professor at Johns Hopkins University who studies Russian information warfare. “They are pushing the same narratives.”

Their intersecting comments could have far-reaching implications, potentially exacerbating polarization in the United States and influencing the midterm elections in November. They could also create a wedge among the right, with those who are pro-Russia at odds with the Republicans who have become vocal champions for the United States to ramp up its military response in Ukraine.

“The question is how much the far-right figures are going to impact the broader media discussion, or push their party,” said Bret Schafer, a senior fellow for the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a Washington nonprofit. “It serves them, and Russia, to muddy the waters and confuse Americans.”

Many of their misleading war narratives, which are sometimes indirect and contradictory, have reached millions. While Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and other platforms limited the reach of Russian state media online after the war began, a variety of far-right Telegram channels, blogs and podcasts took up the task of spreading the Kremlin’s claims. Inside Russia, state media has in turn reflected what some far-right Americans have said.

Mentions of bioweapons labs related to war in Ukraine, for example, have more than doubled — to more than 1,000 a day — since early March on both Russian- and English-language social media, cable TV, and print and online outlets, according to media tracking company Zignal Labs.

The unsubstantiated idea began trending in English-language media late last month, according to Zignal’s analysis. Interest faded by early March as images of injured Ukrainians and bombed cities spread across the internet.

But Russia breathed new life into the conspiracy theory on March 6 when its Defense Ministry claimed in a televised address that it had uncovered “traces of a military biological program being implemented in Ukraine, funded by the U.S. Department of Defense.”

Carlson later aired the Russian statement on his show. Fox News declined to comment and pointed to segments where Carlson has criticized Putin.

Russia laid much of the groundwork for its convergence with many on the American right years ago. Before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency, an organization that professionalized online disinformation, spread inflammatory content through Facebook and other social platforms to sow divisions among Americans and boost Donald Trump, the Republican nominee.

After Trump was elected, he publicly complimented Putin, once calling him “a genius.” The comments helped seed a favorable view of Putin’s strongman style of governance among some Americans.

The coronavirus pandemic further aligned some on the far right with Russia’s propaganda machine. Both sought to undercut confidence in vaccines and mask mandates to foment distrust in the federal government and health agencies. Anti-vaccine Facebook groups and Telegram channels became fertile ground for members of the far right and Russian trolls to hunt for conspiracy theories to promote, Schafer said.

Last month, the coalescing crystallized. As Western intelligence showed that Russia was preparing to invade Ukraine, Putin declared Ukraine an American colony with a “puppet regime” and denied that he planned an invasion.

In the United States, Carlson also called Ukraine “an obedient puppet of the Biden State Department.”

On Feb. 16, Russian state-owned media claimed that Ukraine had “fired mortar shells” at a separatist enclave within Ukraine backed by Russia. Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist, quoted the Russian media’s false assertion on his Telegram channel to 256,000 subscribers. Days later, Kirk also described the heightened situation as a “border dispute.”

A spokesperson for Kirk said it was “patently false” that the podcaster was sympathetic to Russia’s invasion and that he was “rightly questioning” U.S. foreign policy.

On Feb. 24, Putin delivered a speech justifying an invasion of Ukraine. It was transcribed in full on Infowars. On Twitter, Owens, the conservative commentator, repeated Putin’s claim that NATO was expanding eastward toward Russia, blaming the United States for the war. She urged her 3 million followers to read Putin’s speech directly to learn what was “actually” going on.

In an email, Owens said she encouraged “all citizens to read speeches that are given by leaders around the world to better understand their motivations behind actions.” Infowars did not respond to requests for comment.

But the invasion proved highly unpopular among many Americans, leading to a backlash against those who seemed to side with Putin. After far-right podcaster Oltmann said on his Feb. 24 show that he would “stand on the side of Russia,” his co-host, Max McGuire, pushed back.

“Russia’s the bad guy in this situation,” McGuire said. Oltmann and McGuire did not respond to requests for comment.

Others on the right refuted some Kremlin talking points, including that neo-Nazis are rampant in Ukraine and that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a “drug-addled Nazi.” On Feb. 26, Fox News host Neil Cavuto said those accusations were “incredibly over-the-top crazy criticisms.” (Zelenskyy, who is Jewish, signed a law combating antisemitism last fall.)

The lull did not last. American anti-vaccine channels on Telegram soon picked up the bioweapons conspiracy theory, which jumped from private chat groups to far-right podcasts and Infowars.

When Victoria Nuland, an undersecretary of state, was questioned in the Senate this month over whether Ukraine had biological weapons, she said laboratories in the country had materials that could be dangerous if they fell into Russian hands. Jack Posobiec, a far-right commentator, insinuated on his March 9 podcast that Nuland’s answer bolstered the conspiracy theory.

“Everybody needs to come clean about what was going on in those labs, because I guarantee you the Russians are about to put all of it onto the world stage,” said Posobiec, who did not respond to calls seeking comment.

Russian officials also latched on to Nuland’s comments. “The nervous reaction confirms that Russia’s allegations are grounded,” the country’s official account for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted on Twitter.

Beyond the bioweapons conspiracy theory, Joseph Jordan, a white nationalist podcaster who goes by the pseudonym Eric Striker, repeated Russia’s claim that a pregnant woman who was injured in the bombing of a Ukrainian maternity hospital had faked her injuries. In his Telegram channel, Jordan told his 15,000 followers that the hospital photos had been “staged.” He did not respond to a request for comment.

Some Russians have publicly commented on what appears to be common ground with far-right Americans. Last week on the Russian state-backed news program “60 Minutes,” which is not connected to the CBS show of the same name, the host, Olga Skabeeva, addressed the country’s strengthening ties with Carlson.

“Our acquaintance, the host of Fox News Tucker Carlson, obviously has his own interests,” she said, airing several clips of Carlson’s show where he suggested the United States had pushed for conflict in Ukraine. “But lately, more and more often, they’re in tune with our own.”

[Troll]

On 3/23/2022 at 6:26 PM, DBP66 said:

How Russia and Right-Wing Americans Converged on War in Ukraine

 

 

Sheera Frenkel and Stuart A. Thompson

Wed, March 23, 2022, 1:55 PM

 

 

 

The Fox News host Tucker Carlson has echoed Russian claims that the invasion of Ukraine was taken in self-defense. He has also criticized Russia's president, Vladimir Putin. (Justin T. Gellerson/The New York Times)

After President Vladimir Putin of Russia claimed that action against Ukraine was taken in self-defense, Fox News host Tucker Carlson and conservative commentator Candace Owens repeated the assertion. When Putin insisted he was trying to “denazify” Ukraine, Joe Oltmann, a far-right podcaster, and Lara Logan, another right-wing commentator, mirrored the idea.

The echoing went the other way, too. Some far-right U.S. news sites, like Infowars, stoked a longtime, unfounded Russian claim that the United States funded biological weapons labs in Ukraine. Russian officials seized on the chatter, with the Kremlin contending it had documentation of bioweapons programs that justified its “special military operation” in Ukraine.

As war has raged, the Kremlin’s talking points and some right-wing discourse in the United States — fueled by those on the far right — have coalesced. On social media, podcasts and television, falsehoods about the invasion of Ukraine have flowed both ways, with Americans amplifying lies from Russians and the Kremlin spreading fabrications that festered in U.S. forums online.

By reinforcing and feeding each other’s messaging, some right-wing Americans have given credibility to Russia’s assertions and vice versa. Together, they have created an alternate reality, recasting the Western bloc of allies as provokers, blunderers and liars, which has bolstered Putin.

The war initially threw some conservatives — who had insisted no invasion would happen — for a loop. Many criticized Putin and Russia’s assault on Ukraine. Some have since gone on to urge more support for Ukraine.

But in recent days, several far-right commentators have again gravitated to narratives favorable to Putin’s cause. The main one has been the bioweapons conspiracy theory, which has provided a way to talk about the war while focusing criticism on President Joe Biden and the U.S. government instead of Putin and the Kremlin.

“People are asking if the far right in the U.S. is influencing Russia or if Russia is influencing the far right, but the truth is they are influencing each other,” said Thomas Rid, a professor at Johns Hopkins University who studies Russian information warfare. “They are pushing the same narratives.”

Their intersecting comments could have far-reaching implications, potentially exacerbating polarization in the United States and influencing the midterm elections in November. They could also create a wedge among the right, with those who are pro-Russia at odds with the Republicans who have become vocal champions for the United States to ramp up its military response in Ukraine.

“The question is how much the far-right figures are going to impact the broader media discussion, or push their party,” said Bret Schafer, a senior fellow for the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a Washington nonprofit. “It serves them, and Russia, to muddy the waters and confuse Americans.”

Many of their misleading war narratives, which are sometimes indirect and contradictory, have reached millions. While Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and other platforms limited the reach of Russian state media online after the war began, a variety of far-right Telegram channels, blogs and podcasts took up the task of spreading the Kremlin’s claims. Inside Russia, state media has in turn reflected what some far-right Americans have said.

Mentions of bioweapons labs related to war in Ukraine, for example, have more than doubled — to more than 1,000 a day — since early March on both Russian- and English-language social media, cable TV, and print and online outlets, according to media tracking company Zignal Labs.

The unsubstantiated idea began trending in English-language media late last month, according to Zignal’s analysis. Interest faded by early March as images of injured Ukrainians and bombed cities spread across the internet.

But Russia breathed new life into the conspiracy theory on March 6 when its Defense Ministry claimed in a televised address that it had uncovered “traces of a military biological program being implemented in Ukraine, funded by the U.S. Department of Defense.”

Carlson later aired the Russian statement on his show. Fox News declined to comment and pointed to segments where Carlson has criticized Putin.

Russia laid much of the groundwork for its convergence with many on the American right years ago. Before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency, an organization that professionalized online disinformation, spread inflammatory content through Facebook and other social platforms to sow divisions among Americans and boost Donald Trump, the Republican nominee.

After Trump was elected, he publicly complimented Putin, once calling him “a genius.” The comments helped seed a favorable view of Putin’s strongman style of governance among some Americans.

The coronavirus pandemic further aligned some on the far right with Russia’s propaganda machine. Both sought to undercut confidence in vaccines and mask mandates to foment distrust in the federal government and health agencies. Anti-vaccine Facebook groups and Telegram channels became fertile ground for members of the far right and Russian trolls to hunt for conspiracy theories to promote, Schafer said.

Last month, the coalescing crystallized. As Western intelligence showed that Russia was preparing to invade Ukraine, Putin declared Ukraine an American colony with a “puppet regime” and denied that he planned an invasion.

In the United States, Carlson also called Ukraine “an obedient puppet of the Biden State Department.”

On Feb. 16, Russian state-owned media claimed that Ukraine had “fired mortar shells” at a separatist enclave within Ukraine backed by Russia. Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist, quoted the Russian media’s false assertion on his Telegram channel to 256,000 subscribers. Days later, Kirk also described the heightened situation as a “border dispute.”

A spokesperson for Kirk said it was “patently false” that the podcaster was sympathetic to Russia’s invasion and that he was “rightly questioning” U.S. foreign policy.

On Feb. 24, Putin delivered a speech justifying an invasion of Ukraine. It was transcribed in full on Infowars. On Twitter, Owens, the conservative commentator, repeated Putin’s claim that NATO was expanding eastward toward Russia, blaming the United States for the war. She urged her 3 million followers to read Putin’s speech directly to learn what was “actually” going on.

In an email, Owens said she encouraged “all citizens to read speeches that are given by leaders around the world to better understand their motivations behind actions.” Infowars did not respond to requests for comment.

But the invasion proved highly unpopular among many Americans, leading to a backlash against those who seemed to side with Putin. After far-right podcaster Oltmann said on his Feb. 24 show that he would “stand on the side of Russia,” his co-host, Max McGuire, pushed back.

“Russia’s the bad guy in this situation,” McGuire said. Oltmann and McGuire did not respond to requests for comment.

Others on the right refuted some Kremlin talking points, including that neo-Nazis are rampant in Ukraine and that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a “drug-addled Nazi.” On Feb. 26, Fox News host Neil Cavuto said those accusations were “incredibly over-the-top crazy criticisms.” (Zelenskyy, who is Jewish, signed a law combating antisemitism last fall.)

The lull did not last. American anti-vaccine channels on Telegram soon picked up the bioweapons conspiracy theory, which jumped from private chat groups to far-right podcasts and Infowars.

When Victoria Nuland, an undersecretary of state, was questioned in the Senate this month over whether Ukraine had biological weapons, she said laboratories in the country had materials that could be dangerous if they fell into Russian hands. Jack Posobiec, a far-right commentator, insinuated on his March 9 podcast that Nuland’s answer bolstered the conspiracy theory.

“Everybody needs to come clean about what was going on in those labs, because I guarantee you the Russians are about to put all of it onto the world stage,” said Posobiec, who did not respond to calls seeking comment.

Russian officials also latched on to Nuland’s comments. “The nervous reaction confirms that Russia’s allegations are grounded,” the country’s official account for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted on Twitter.

Beyond the bioweapons conspiracy theory, Joseph Jordan, a white nationalist podcaster who goes by the pseudonym Eric Striker, repeated Russia’s claim that a pregnant woman who was injured in the bombing of a Ukrainian maternity hospital had faked her injuries. In his Telegram channel, Jordan told his 15,000 followers that the hospital photos had been “staged.” He did not respond to a request for comment.

Some Russians have publicly commented on what appears to be common ground with far-right Americans. Last week on the Russian state-backed news program “60 Minutes,” which is not connected to the CBS show of the same name, the host, Olga Skabeeva, addressed the country’s strengthening ties with Carlson.

“Our acquaintance, the host of Fox News Tucker Carlson, obviously has his own interests,” she said, airing several clips of Carlson’s show where he suggested the United States had pushed for conflict in Ukraine. “But lately, more and more often, they’re in tune with our own.”

Yer Propaganda reeeeeeeeeally sux...🤡

Here's a bone 🦴

Ya can use it on all those righties

who say UKR is all Joey's fault 🙄

 

The University of Chicago

UnCommon Core: The Causes and Consequences of the Ukraine Crisis John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor in Political Science and Co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, assesses the causes of the present Ukraine crisis, the best way to end it, and its consequences for all of the main actors. A key assumption is that in order to come up with the optimum plan for ending the crisis, it is essential to know what caused the crisis. Regarding the all-important question of causes, the key issue is whether Russia or the West bears primary responsibility.

(recommend bumping the speed to 1.75x  for this longer one)

 

PS: actual understanding takes seeing things from "all" sides...

...even if you don't agree with "all" the other angles,

than your preferred view. 

🤓

 

BTW: At what point did you notice the date ? 🤔

kinda hard to pin all the blame on Joey exactly huh...

 

[DBP66]

45 minutes ago, Troll said:

Yer Propaganda reeeeeeeeeally sux...🤡

Here's a bone 🦴

Ya can use it on all those righties

who say UKR is all Joey's fault 🙄

 

The University of Chicago

UnCommon Core: The Causes and Consequences of the Ukraine Crisis John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor in Political Science and Co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, assesses the causes of the present Ukraine crisis, the best way to end it, and its consequences for all of the main actors. A key assumption is that in order to come up with the optimum plan for ending the crisis, it is essential to know what caused the crisis. Regarding the all-important question of causes, the key issue is whether Russia or the West bears primary responsibility.

(recommend bumping the speed to 1.75x  for this longer one)

 

PS: actual understanding takes seeing things from "all" sides...

...even if you don't agree with "all" the other angles,

than your preferred view. 

🤓

 

BTW: At what point did you notice the date ? 🤔

kinda hard to pin all the blame on Joey exactly huh...

 

2015??..LOL....a lot has changed since then...and you always seem to go with the guy wearing the tin foil hat?....you never found a conspiracy you didn't like,,,🙄

[Troll]

26 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

2015??..LOL....a lot has changed since then...and you always seem to go with the guy wearing the tin foil hat?....you never found a conspiracy you didn't like,,,🙄

PSSSSsssssssst....

1 hour ago, Troll said:

BTW: At what point did you notice the date ? 🤔

kinda hard to pin all the blame on Joey exactly huh...

 

 

Yes 2015 ....

under that lefty big O ....duh 🤡

So what has changed exactly

since ?

🤔

 

PS: Current history is lost on you...

🤡🤡

 

BTW: In 2022 "conspiracy theory"...

...is short for "spoiler alert".

🤡🤡🤡

[Troll]

Oh and I'm pretty sure, that some  "Distinguished Service Professor in Political Science and Co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago" giving an assessment, with ~23 million views, is not considered some "tin foil hat" guy

🎩

 

PS: So which part of the historical presentation,

do you see as some "conspiracy" ?

🤡

 

[concha]

[concha]

Psaki Reminds Reporters That Biden Doesn't Speak For The President Of The United States

Politics

March 29th, 2022 - BabylonBee.com

 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—In a tense press conference Monday, Press Secretary Jen Psaki faced pointed questions about several Biden misstatements that led to chaos during his trip overseas. Psaki quickly reassured the gathered press that Biden doesn't speak for the President of the United States.

"The President has clearly said, and we agree, that Joe Biden does not speak for this administration," said Psaki to the confused reporters. "Nothing said by Biden should be misconstrued to reflect the official foreign policy of the President. This administration has been clear from the beginning, that we have always been clear about what we have been clear about, clearly."

"But Jen!" said a feisty Peter Doocy, "Don't you think these inconsistent statements could cause World War III and unleash CRT on our kids all at once? Why did Biden have to walk back his statements?"

"We would like to walk back the statement that we have ever walked back any statements," said a frustrated Psaki. "But if you find any statements that we have walked back let me know and we'll circle back later to walk back our walk-back." 

Sources say Biden is now in his basement on tranquilizers until the administration can clarify what statements need to be walked back. 

[DBP66]

[concha]

[DBP66]

10 hours ago, concha said:

nice red-neck meme...🤡

[DBP66]

Republican-controlled states have higher murder rates than Democratic ones: study

Ben Adler

·Senior Editor

Mon, April 4, 2022, 5:21 PM

 

 

Republican politicians routinely claim that cities run by Democrats have been experiencing crime waves caused by failed governance, but a new study shows murder rates are actually higher in states and cities controlled by Republicans.

“We’re seeing murders in our cities, all Democrat-run,” former President Donald Trump asserted at a March 26 rally in Georgia. “People are afraid to go out.”

In February, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., blamed Democrats for a 2018 law that reduced some federal prison sentences — even though it was signed by Trump after passing a GOP-controlled Congress. “It’s your party who voted in lockstep for the First Step Act that let thousands of violent felons on the street who have now committed innumerable violent crimes,” Cotton said during a speech in the Senate.

Last December, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Tex., told Fox News viewers that “America’s most beautiful cities are indeed being ruined by liberal policies: There’s a direct line between death and decay and liberal policies.”

 

Former President Donald Trump speaks at a rally at a rally on March 26 in Commerce, Ga. (Megan Varner/Getty Images)

But a comparison of violent crime rates in jurisdictions controlled by Democrats and Republicans tells a very different story. In fact, a new study from the center-left think tank Third Way shows that states won by Trump in the 2020 election have higher murder rates than those carried by President Biden. The highest murder rates, the study found, are often in conservative, rural states.

The study found that murder rates in the 25 states Trump carried in 2020 are 40% higher overall than in the states Biden won. (The report used 2020 data because 2021 data is not yet fully available.) The five states with the highest per capita murder rate — Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama, and Missouri — all lean Republican and voted for Trump.

There are some examples of states Biden won in 2020 that also have high per-capita murder rates, including New Mexico and Georgia, which have the seventh- and eighth-highest murder rates, respectively. And there are Trump-supporting states with low murder rates, such as Idaho and Utah. Broadly speaking, the South, and to a lesser extent the Midwest, have more murders per capita than the Northeast, interior West and West Coast, the study found.

Those findings are consistent with a pattern that has existed for decades, in which the South has had higher rates of violent crime than the nation as a whole.

 

Demonstrators march in Atlanta, Ga., on April 14, 2021, to protest the shooting death of Daunte Wright three days earlier. (Megan Varner/Getty Images)

“We as criminologists have known this for quite some time,” Jennifer Ortiz, a professor of criminology at Indiana University Southeast, told Yahoo News. “States like Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have historically had high crime rates.”

Criminologists say research shows higher rates of violent crime are found in areas that have low average education levels, high rates of poverty and relatively modest access to government assistance. Those conditions characterize some portions of the American South.

“They are among the poorest states in our union,” Ortiz said of the Deep South. “They have among the highest rates of child poverty. They are among the least-educated states. They are among the states with the highest levels of substance abuse. All of those factors contribute to people engaging in criminal behavior.”

“I thought that was a very good study,” Richard Rosenfeld, a professor of criminology at the University of Missouri-St. Louis and former president of the American Society of Criminology, told Yahoo News about the Third Way report. “In Republican states, states with Republican governors, crime rates tend to be higher. I’m not certain that’s related to the fact that the governor is a Republican, but it’s a fact nonetheless.”

 

Police and emergency personnel work on a crime scene in November 2021 in Waukesha, Wisc. (Jim Vondruska/Getty Images)

(While the Third Way study divided states by presidential vote in 2020, using gubernatorial party affiliation leads to similar results because most states have recently chosen the same party for governor and for president. Based on presidential vote, eight of the 10 states with the highest murder rates lean Republican, versus seven of the top 10 if one uses the governor’s party.)

Although murder rates tend to be highest in the South, the biggest increases in 2020 were found in the Great Plains and Midwest, according to Third Way. The largest jumps were in Wyoming (91.7% higher than in 2019), South Dakota (69%), Wisconsin (63.2%), Nebraska (59.1%), and Minnesota (58.1%). Wyoming, South Dakota and Nebraska all voted for Trump and have Republican governors. Wisconsin and Minnesota voted for Biden and are led by Democrats.

Few large cities are governed by Republicans — only 26 of the 100 largest U.S. cities have Republican mayors — making apples-to-apples comparisons difficult. But cities that do have Republican mayors do not have lower murder rates than similarly sized Democrat-led cities, the study found.

Some experts warn against the impulse to use crime data to score quick political points.

“Being a Republican or Democratic state or city is correlated with many other issues,” David Weisburd, a professor of criminology and executive director of the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy at George Mason University, wrote in an email to Yahoo News. “That means that the murder rate may be due to the state being Republican, or it may be due to the fact that Republican states have many other risk factors related to crime or murder rates. Even with a very comprehensive modeling of all of these factors, it is very difficult to get a valid causal result for explaining crime rates.”

 

Police tape blocks a street where a person was shot in a drug-related incident in Philadelphia in 2021. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

That argument cuts both ways, however. Weisburd also thinks the claims of Trump and other Republicans who say that Democrats have caused a crime wave in the cities and states they govern are unfounded. “I don't think this argument can be supported no matter which way you go,” Weisburd said.

Murder rates in the U.S. rose dramatically in 2020 from record lows, and the increases are similar across states — regardless of partisan preference. For homicides in 2020, Third Way found a 32.2% uptick in Trump-backing states versus a 30.8% rise in those that voted for Biden. Some states with large cities, such as New York and Pennsylvania, saw larger-than-average increases: New York went up 47% and Pennsylvania is up 39%. But the largest increases were in rural, Republican-led states, including Montana (+84%) and South Dakota (+81%).

The higher national murder rate is naturally causing public concern, although violent crime does remain far below its early 1990s high point. “Using the FBI data, the violent crime rate fell 49% between 1993 and 2019,” from 757 incidents per 100,000 people to 379 per 100,000, the Pew Research Center noted last November. Between 2019 and 2020, the murder rate jumped from 6 homicides per 100,000 people to 7.8 homicides per 100,000, but that was still 22% below the rate in 1991 of 10 homicides per 100,000

[concha]

 

In these high murder rate states, where are the focal points for those rates?

Is Missouri's high state murder rate of 14 per 100k driven by St Louis' 65 per 100k?

Is Maryland's 11.4 rate driven by Baltimore's rate of 58?

Is Alabama's high rate driven by Birmingham's rate of 51?

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/47/

 

How far down the list until a Republican-run city?

How many of the worst 25 are Republican-led?

 

[concha]

[DBP66]

22 minutes ago, concha said:

 

In these high murder rate states, where are the focal points for those rates?

Is Missouri's high state murder rate of 14 per 100k driven by St Louis' 65 per 100k?

Is Maryland's 11.4 rate driven by Baltimore's rate of 58?

Is Alabama's high rate driven by Birmingham's rate of 51?

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/47/

 

How far down the list until a Republican-run city?

How many of the worst 25 are Republican-led?

 

“We as criminologists have known this for quite some time,” Jennifer Ortiz, a professor of criminology at Indiana University Southeast, told Yahoo News. “States like Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have historically had high crime rates.”

[DBP66]

never mind can you define what a women is?...can you and/or your daughter define what Federal Election campaign finance rules are??....apparently not....🤡

 

The ‘G’ in GOP often stands for Grift, and Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) knows it all too well. Blackburn has spent 30 years in government. She just got caught taking from Tennessee families while enriching her own.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been funneled, from both Blackburn’s Congressional and Senate campaigns, into the accounts of companies owned by Blackburn’s daughter, Mary Morgan Ketchel, and her husband, Paul Ketchel III.

The thievery operated right out of the basement of the Ketchels’ Nashville home.

Since 2002, firms owned by Mary Ketchel and her spouse cashed in on $370,000 in payments from her Tennessee Republican Senator’s mommy’s campaign funds.

In 2004, while a Congresswoman, Blackburn’s son-in-law Paul registered as a lobbyist. That same year, Ketchel lobbied for Dialogic Communication’s Corp. A contributor to Blackburn’s political campaign. Ketchel received $300,000 from the federal contractor and maker of emergency notification technology. That is the kind of unethical-looking payment that is legal if reported. But there’s always a twist with the Blackburn clan.

[concha]

1 hour ago, DBP66 said:

never mind can you define what a women is?...can you and/or your daughter define what Federal Election campaign finance rules are??....apparently not....🤡

 

The ‘G’ in GOP often stands for Grift, and Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) knows it all too well. Blackburn has spent 30 years in government. She just got caught taking from Tennessee families while enriching her own.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been funneled, from both Blackburn’s Congressional and Senate campaigns, into the accounts of companies owned by Blackburn’s daughter, Mary Morgan Ketchel, and her husband, Paul Ketchel III.

The thievery operated right out of the basement of the Ketchels’ Nashville home.

Since 2002, firms owned by Mary Ketchel and her spouse cashed in on $370,000 in payments from her Tennessee Republican Senator’s mommy’s campaign funds.

In 2004, while a Congresswoman, Blackburn’s son-in-law Paul registered as a lobbyist. That same year, Ketchel lobbied for Dialogic Communication’s Corp. A contributor to Blackburn’s political campaign. Ketchel received $300,000 from the federal contractor and maker of emergency notification technology. That is the kind of unethical-looking payment that is legal if reported. But there’s always a twist with the Blackburn clan.

 

Not sure how accurate or honest this info is. I'm guessing you didn't post a link as the source is probably a left-wing propaganda organization. In any case, your source has probably not focused on, oh I don't know... Maxine Waters?

 

Curious what this has to do with putting someone on the SCOTUS who is incapable of providing a definition for "woman" when she considers herself one. Pure partisan gaming and dishonesty. Or stupidity. Take your pick.

And I'm guessing you easily turn a blind eye to someone with a history of light treatment for people who sexually victimize children.  Black, brown, white... Skin color doesn't matter. That is alarming and reprehensible.

 

 

 

 

[DBP66]

1 hour ago, concha said:

 

Not sure how accurate or honest this info is. I'm guessing you didn't post a link as the source is probably a left-wing propaganda organization. In any case, your source has probably not focused on, oh I don't know... Maxine Waters?

 

Curious what this has to do with putting someone on the SCOTUS who is incapable of providing a definition for "woman" when she considers herself one. Pure partisan gaming and dishonesty. Or stupidity. Take your pick.

And I'm guessing you easily turn a blind eye to someone with a history of light treatment for people who sexually victimize children.  Black, brown, white... Skin color doesn't matter. That is alarming and reprehensible.

 

 

 

 

so you decided to go down Cruz Ave. with the "she likes pedophiles" narrative?!...figures..LOL...she has more judicial experience than the clowns you cheer for...like Clarence the Clown...with the nutty wife..🤡

[Ga96]

32 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

so you decided to go down Cruz Ave. with the "she likes pedophiles" narrative?!...figures..LOL...she has more judicial experience than the clowns you cheer for...like Clarence the Clown...with the nutty wife..🤡

Can't reason with his type they thrive off of ignorance. Its better they just wait until they fade away. It'll take a long time but trumpers conservatives and whatever concha is will be a thing of the past. Same with the old democrats. 

[concha]

30 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

so you decided to go down Cruz Ave. with the "she's likes pedophiles" narrative?!...figures..LOL...she has more judicial experience than the clowns you cheer for...like Clarence the Clown...with the nutty wife..🤡

 

You are a moron so your inability to follow along and need to deflect are expected.

Ted Cruz and Clarence Thomas have nothing to do with her going light on sentencing pedophiles. They have nothing to answer for. She does. You pushed for a woman (a word she couldn't even define!) who went light on these despicable human beings literally every time she could. You could have said "That's just a huge red flag and a deal breaker, let's get the next black lady judge up", but you stuck with her.  It speaks volumes about you.

 

 

[concha]

1 minute ago, Ga96 said:

Can't reason with his type they thrive off of ignorance. Its better they just wait until they fade away. It'll take a long time but trumpers conservatives and whatever concha is will be a thing of the past. Same with the old democrats. 

 

She didn't go light on literally every pedophile sentencing she was involved with? You are OK with that? Perhaps you like little children, so her sentencing approach appeals to you?

And ignorance? Your candidate couldn't even define what a woman is.

BTW, imbecile, do you have any idea about the colossal ass-whipping you're getting in November? I honestly don't know which of you two fukwits is more intellectually challenged. You're that fucking stupid. 🤣

 

[DBP66]

17 minutes ago, concha said:

 

You are a moron so your inability to follow along and need to deflect are expected.

Ted Cruz and Clarence Thomas have nothing to do with her going light on sentencing pedophiles. They have nothing to answer for. She does. You pushed for a woman (a word she couldn't even define!) who went light on these despicable human beings literally every time she could. You could have said "That's just a huge red flag and a deal breaker, let's get the next black lady judge up", but you stuck with her.  It speaks volumes about you.

 

 

and you didn't like her from the get-go because she was black...or any other candidate who would have been nominated because they were a black women...the idea of diversity on the court went right over your head....SAD...we all know where you're coming from....🤡

[DBP66]

10 minutes ago, concha said:

 

She didn't go light on literally every pedophile sentencing she was involved with? You are OK with that? Perhaps you like little children, so her sentencing approach appeals to you?

And ignorance? Your candidate couldn't even define what a woman is.

BTW, imbecile, do you have any idea about the colossal ass-whipping you're getting in November? I honestly don't know which of you two fukwits is more intellectually challenged. You're that fucking stupid. 🤣

 

the party who wins the Presidency always takes a beating the following election cycle Nostradamus...they didn't pass anything to make them look good but took credit for the bill passed by the Democrats...all they do is point finger at Biden and the gas pumps...back to your Don Rickles act...so soon??...LOL..🤡

[concha]

Just now, DBP66 said:

and you didn't like her from the get-go because she was black...or any other candidate who would have been nominated because they were black women...the idea of diversity on the court went right over your head....SAD...we all know where you're coming from....🤡

 

Wrong.

I don't care about her skin color at all apart from the shameful way race was used in the selection process.

This process involved the sale of a SCOTUS seat based on race for a political endorsement. I also have an issue with her approach to convicted pedophiles and the ridiculous response she gave when asked the simple question of defining what a woman is.

You, of course, are an idiot and thus have to resort to throwing race cards. Continue as expected.

 

[DBP66]

3 minutes ago, concha said:

 

Wrong.

I don't care about her skin color at all apart from the shameful way race was used in the selection process.

This process involved the sale of a SCOTUS seat based on race for a political endorsement. I also have an issue with her approach to convicted pedophiles and the ridiculous response she gave when asked the simple question of defining what a woman is.

You, of course, are an idiot and thus have to resort to throwing race cards. Continue as expected.

 

That shameful process was also taken by Ronald Reagan....he understood what diversity meant and how important it is...unlike you...SAD.

[concha]

2 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

the party who wins the Presidency always takes a beating the following election cycle Nostradamus...they didn't pass anything to make them look good but took credit for the bill passed by the Democrats...all they do is point finger at Biden and the gas pumps...back to your Don Rickles act...so soon??...LOL..🤡

 

Republicans usually don't poll ahead of Dems in generic congressional polling and actually tend to do worse than the polling in the actual elections.

Republicans are currently up by 3 points.

Your lack of intellect will render the above meaningless to you.