The truth is not an insult, no matter how much you're offended by it.
I call people out for effeminate, dishonest, and intellectually bereft decisions, because those things are what cause grown men to behave like little girls, and are directly linked to a person's political views. And, when grown men conduct themselves like little girls, they might as well be wearing "I'm with her-»” t-shirts, because everyone knows they're DemonKKKraps. If that offends you, take it up with your science-denying Leftist cult, which preaches that men can be women, if they think they are, that there's no difference between men and women, that plant food is a toxic gas, that will cause the planet to explode in a ball of fire in 12yrs, and that darter snails are more human than humans, but that newborn babies are just clumps of unviable cancerous cells, if the mother finds being a mother inconvenient.
Let me play Nostradamus, for a moment, though, and predict that you'll address zero of the above science-denial and intellectual inconsistencies of which your fellow partisans are guilty, and will just choose to continue whistling past that graveyard. (i hope I'm wrong, because it's boring always being right)
If I wanted to insult you, I'd point out that I wouldn't trust you to analyse the lint in your own navel, because I've witnessed zero capacity for you to objectively review and to correctly interpret easily accessible data.
I might, also, point out that civil engineering is to engineering as political science is to science, and that paying $100k for a 14% shot at getting a civil service job, in which your sole duty is approving permits for the plans of real engineers is a poor gamble with a dubious payoff.
But, I won't say any of those things, because I know you're a tender soul, and I don't want to crush your spirit.
I studied finance in college, and considered getting an MBA or going to law school, but figured 4 yrs in close proximity to Marxist idiots was more than enough for one man.
I have an extensive background in management and marketing, and took over the company I currently run, back when the 2008 financial crash caused it to stumble(it probably wouldn't have survived if we hadn't moved in). I put together an offer and brought in a partner.
(I hope that's enough, because it's all you're getting)
You still don't seem to grasp the data. Maybe, this will help you understand:
Imagine, if you can, that you are studying how a breed of pygmy rats responds to various diets. You introduce one new variable at a time, and one experiment yields a 10% increase in size and strength among one group of rats. When the dietary element deemed responsible for the gains is increased, size and strength of this pygmy rat breed continues to correspondingly increase. Although these pygmy rats can experience growth of up to 50%, they still are nowhere near the size of Gambian rats...and you, therefore, discontinue your research, considering it too insignificant to publish, and record that your experiments yielded no results?
Of course not. That would be stupid. Right? Only a complete idiot would ignore a significant statistical deviation. Right?
Well, that's what you're doing, when you ignore the statistical deviation in political views held by those possessing positive characteristics, compared to those possessing negative characteristics.
It's really so simple that even a 5 year old could understand it, even if a civil engineer can't.
Take the entire body of available voters. Tallied all together, the electorate is left-leaning to moderate(at best). However, remove trannies from the electorate, and it moves right. Remove homosexuals from the electorate, and it moves further right. Remove welfare dependents, and it moves further right. Remove unmarried women, and it moves further right. Remove people with diagnosed mental illness, and it moves further right. Remove people with 2 digit IQs, and it moves further right. Remove people with limited life experience, represented by voters younger than 30, and the electorate moves further right. Remove women, and it leaps further right. In other words, the more the electorate resembles the pool of candidates most voters would be comfortable voting FOR, the more conservative the actual electorate. If you still can't grasp THAT, what you're experiencing is cognitive dissonance.
It's quite clear that Leftists are the science-denialists, as has been repeatedly demonstrated, but keep telling yourself whatever fantasies you need to get you through the day.
By the way, it's quite Freudian of you to continually associate conservatives with "nutbags," since the majority of Leftists are nutless. I suspect you have testicular envy. Perhaps, one day, your own nutsack will drop, and you'll become a conservative, like a full-grown man.
You understand so little that it's amazing if you can tie your own shoes. Do you wear velcro sneakers?
It's like this: smart people begin life as full-fledged conservatives. Mediocre people will become more conservative as they gain life experience. Stupid people will begin and end their lives as Leftists.
”But," I hear you saying, "there are some very smart AND very rich Leftists; what about THEM?!"
In response, I call your attention to the fact that there are many geniuses and wealthy con-artists in P R I S O N, too...AND, most of the prison population leans Left; do you want to claim THEM, too?
The thing about intelligence is that it isn't always accompanied by virtue, and when it isn't, as alluded to above, that person tends to end up on the Left.