Simple Math ("Stupid")

cawacko

cawacko

Well-known member
Would someone please be so kind as to explain to me how this below means that Ron Paul voted with the Republicans 75% out of 80% of the time. (This is not a partisan question. It is a reading comprehension and math question.)

This is information that was provided ealier in the article... "Ron Paul has missed 169 votes (20.0%) during the current Congress."

Here is the statement...

"Ron Paul has voted with a majority of his Republican colleagues 75.0% of the time during the current Congress. This percentage does not include votes in which Paul did not vote."

Thank you.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/p000583/
 
I'm not sure what you're asking; it seems crystal clear to me:


Of the times that Ron Paul cast a vote, 75% of those votes were with the majority of his republican collegues.
 
Cypress said:
I'm not sure what you're asking; it seems crystal clear to me:


Of the times that Ron Paul cast a vote, 75% of those votes were with the majority of his republican collegues.
Click to expand...

Fair enough you weren't here for this yesterday.

The debate was whether the article stated Paul voted with Republicans 75% of the time out of his 100% of votes. Or rather Paul voted with the Republicans 75% out of his 80% of votes (subtracting the 20% of votes he missed).

I will tell you my argument and position afterwards. I would appreciate your opinion. Again, this had nothing to do with partisanship. It's a simple reading comoprehension question.
 
cawacko said:
Fair enough you weren't here for this yesterday.

The debate was whether the article stated Paul voted with Republicans 75% of the time out of his 100% of votes. Or rather Paul voted with the Republicans 75% out of his 80% of votes (subtracting the 20% of votes he missed).

I will tell you my argument and position afterwards. I would appreciate your opinion. Again, this had nothing to do with partisanship. It's a simple reading comoprehension question.
Click to expand...


A pitcher's ERA is calcualted based on the games he plays in. They don't include the games he misses. Shaq's average number of blocked shots/per game is calculated on the games he plays in, not the games he misses. I don't see the problem.
 
Cypress said:
A pitcher's ERA is calcualted based on the games he plays in. They don't include the games he misses. Shaq's average number of blocked shots/per game is calculated on the games he plays in, not the games he misses. I don't see the problem.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The article states so as well. This percentage is based on his votes, not the ones he missed.

I don't mean to make it personal but I wasted a f*cking hour yesterday arguing this with citizen and he now thinks "he's in my head" and that I'm rattled somehow.
 
cawacko said:
Fair enough you weren't here for this yesterday.

The debate was whether the article stated Paul voted with Republicans 75% of the time out of his 100% of votes. Or rather Paul voted with the Republicans 75% out of his 80% of votes (subtracting the 20% of votes he missed).

I will tell you my argument and position afterwards. I would appreciate your opinion. Again, this had nothing to do with partisanship. It's a simple reading comoprehension question.
Click to expand...

Congrats, you have it figured out.
again sorry for the confusion I created by not reading the entire paragraph.
 
Cypress said:
A pitcher's ERA is calcualted based on the games he plays in. They don't include the games he misses. Shaq's average number of blocked shots/per game is calculated on the games he plays in, not the games he misses. I don't see the problem.
Click to expand...

Um with a politician it can be a question of why he did not vote on some of the issues. Ie afraid to go against his party on some things.
Not quite like baseball.
 
Cypress said:
Oh, well I didn't realize that this was some dispute between you and USC.

Carry on then!
Click to expand...

We weren't getting anywhere and that's why I wanted a neutral third party to state their thoughts. Unlike most political topics this was clearly a quanatative question that has one answer. Like I said, it's not partisan.
 
cawacko said:
Exactly. The article states so as well. This percentage is based on his votes, not the ones he missed.

I don't mean to make it personal but I wasted a f*cking hour yesterday arguing this with citizen and he now thinks "he's in my head" and that I'm rattled somehow.
Click to expand...

LOL! But if you're putting up threads about it he is in your head.

Why is it that you can't get along with usc? That's been a surprise for me. I've noticed it.
 
uscitizen said:
Um with a politician it can be a question of why he did not vote on some of the issues. Ie afraid to go against his party on some things.
Not quite like baseball.
Click to expand...
Nah, you'll find that Senators and Congressmen running for office often miss procedural votes.
 
uscitizen said:
Um with a politician it can be a question of why he did not vote on some of the issues. Ie afraid to go against his party on some things.
Not quite like baseball.
Click to expand...

Dude, for the thousandth time that was not the point. You are not getting it because you are trying to see it as a partisan issue when it is not. I will not post the quote for the 5th time. Read what the arrticle said.
 
Darla said:
LOL! But if you're putting up threads about it he is in your head.

Why is it that you can't get along with usc? That's been a surprise for me. I've noticed it.
Click to expand...

In a sense yes because when someone calls you stupid when they can't understand a simple reading comprehension question it bothered me.
 
cawacko said:
Dude, for the thousandth time that was not the point. You are not getting it because you are trying to see it as a partisan issue when it is not. I will not post the quote for the 5th time. Read what the arrticle said.
Click to expand...

K i will give up on this then.
 
uscitizen said:
Umm right, but you might want to look thru pauls missed vote list....
there are a few in there that .....
Click to expand...
That what? He was on the trail for? Did you compare his voting percentages with those years he was not running for President or do you make assumptions that the "current congress" means all of his votes for all time?
 
uscitizen said:
K i will give up on this then.
Click to expand...

I know you and Cawacko don't think so, but I think this is so funny, and have been laughing over this whole back and forth thing with you two. And I needed to laugh, because i haven't laughed on this board since Damocles brutalized me on another thread this morning.
 
Damocles said:
That what? He was on the trail for? Did you compare his voting percentages with those years he was not running for President or do you make assumptions that the "current congress" means all of his votes for all time?
Click to expand...
Nope and as I told cawacko I am outa here on this....
My final answer ( locked in ) is Paul is an insignificant blip in the presidential election and is not worthy of further consideration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top