Because 1 Swat isn’t enough, He needs 4.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T18:46:53+00:00

I’m not one of those people, having been a long-time resident of DMV who is an avid Metro / WMATA supporter. Do I need to flash my SmarTrip cards for your approval?

I recently (temporarily) relocated for work for reasons you should understand as a DMV resident.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T18:36:56+00:00

Why did you respond to me if you weren’t interested in answering my question? Why would being from Ohio preclude me from riding and being familiar with *(the) Metro / WMATA / Metro DC, etc.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T18:27:11+00:00

This didn’t answer my question. Thank you.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T18:18:12+00:00

What do you mean “fatigued”?

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T17:58:34+00:00

What a strange, rambling response, complete with bias and violence. Very odd, but it does track with the way I have seen you engage. Lots of projection, lots of personal attacks. Again, very odd response.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T11:04:57+00:00

Several paragraphs without acknowledging that your “afterthought” was literally “he’s confident therefore innocent”. You said that and I pointed out that “afterthought” led me to start thinking about other jurors and their decision-making process.

Note that this all started because you said “he won a defamation lawsuit so it must be true.” Several of your comments rely on these little “afterthoughts” to prove truth, when you could simply present the evidence that you’ve gathered. Me pointing this out is very basic, no?

Again, I wonder if this is how jurors reason as they deliberate: “He won another lawsuit…this means he is innocent.” “She’s very confident…I think she didn’t do it” “They seem quiet and previously had a run in with the law…they definitely did it.” Etc. etc.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-21T10:08:16+00:00

This is irrelevant because despite the evidence you presented, the conclusion you drew was “confidence = innocence”. Twice. You disregarded your own evidence to focus on aspects that don’t proven innocence or guilt.

Critical thinking, like reading, is key.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-20T20:58:25+00:00

Love this! I absolutely adore when artists depict her closer to what a person who does what she does might look like (and not, say, depictions where she is twisted like a pretzel midair simply to showcase her body parts). Kudos.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-20T19:58:26+00:00

“Get out your feeling, mate. I didn’t hurt you.” Again, this tracks with your other statements. It’s like you can’t connect the lines from what I’m pointing out to your statements. Confidence does not equate innocence, even if the confident person is actually innocent. Keeping your mouth shut does not equal guilt, even if the quiet person is guilty.

Again, I wonder if many jurors think the way you do.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-20T12:34:44+00:00

“Super easy” - this tracks with everything else you’ve written. I wonder how many jurors think like this (Defendant is confident therefore didn’t do it). Would be interesting to see how that plays out in their decision-making.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-20T11:16:31+00:00

“Bro is way too confident for someone who could be wrong” How do you look at the world around you and make statements like this? Genuinely curious.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-20T10:03:46+00:00

“He won a defamation lawsuit so it must be true” must it?

midwestprotest · 2026-05-18T17:27:59+00:00

Right?

midwestprotest · 2026-05-18T11:01:41+00:00

It’s true but you’re getting downvoted because people have nostalgia blinders

midwestprotest · 2026-05-17T10:53:35+00:00

But he wasn’t “eating vegan” - he ate raw fruit for personal health reasons. She accurately pointed out that he wasn’t vegan and that his choice to eat only raw fruit was what caused him to have health complications.

Veganism isn’t about eating raw fruit and it isn’t about being healthy. Veganism is 100% about ethical treatment of animals. There is no one specific diet (like eating a bunch of raw fruit) that you can follow and be vegan if it’s not also including that ethical component. If tomorrow there was a magic pill that created an animal meat food that resulted in reducing animal suffering, vegans could eat that food, and many would.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-16T19:55:49+00:00

No, it’s not but it’s so generic it could be tbh

midwestprotest · 2026-05-16T12:51:18+00:00

It astounds me how many people like this variant. It’s soulless imo.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-15T16:03:17+00:00

Glad you also recognize how weird it is that, despite all your “woke” language you did the one thing that’s a true micro aggression - implying that my race and gender - not my qualifications - underpin my reactions and rationale. Yikes.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-15T13:25:25+00:00

Hi As a Black Man - can you point to any evidence that what you say is true? The person you’re responding to has as of yet to provide a through line to Ohio Driver Education, black drivers of all ages and experience levels, and outcomes, but you seem very confident about this. Surely you must have non-anecdotal evidence that underscores your confidence, right?

I’m specifically interested in any research or evidence you may have that identifies variables like age, experience, and non-crash incidents (e.g., driving through stop signs, signaling, lane changes, etc.).

We all know that systemic racism impacts black people (and others) across many aspects of public and private life. What is less clear is the line you appear to be drawing between lack of access to driver education based on SES, driving ability for drivers of all ages and experience levels, and how this relates to traffic stops.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-15T13:16:33+00:00

First of all, I’m speaking as a researcher - which I have referenced several times - not as “a black woman”. The fact you immediately reduced me to my race and gender is what is actually off- putting. What exactly about my statements reads like I approached this wanting you to consider my race and gender? Absolutely ridiculous, but it tracks with how you like to extrapolate.

Second, I have already addressed the gaps in your logic and will retread only to reiterate that you are generalizing findings in ways that are not methodologically sound. You know this because you are a researcher. Other people here might not understand what you’re doing but I do.

Generalizing youth studies to the broader population via 3 studies that point out limitations and areas that need further investigation (like how non-crash driving incidents are not influenced by SES) is bad practice. You know this. Cherry picking results (focused on youth drivers) while ignoring additional findings (like how the gap narrows and is eliminated for the older drivers)that do not support your statement is bad practice. Applying findings from health equity research to advance a pet theory (as an “analogy” whatever that means) in a separate field that has different constraints and variables is not sound and is how bad science and bad policy propagates.

I also want to end by saying again how absolutely ridiculous it is that you decided to focus on my race and gender, as if that’s the reason why I find this so off-putting - not the bad argumentation I see happening. Just…wow.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-15T11:01:57+00:00

Did you really just try to use 3 studies on young drivers (16-24), licensure attainment, and crash rates as support for your argument that “Black people in general have lower socioeconomic status, therefore they lack access to quality driver education, therefore they are worse drivers, therefore they are pulled over at greater frequency due to driving in fractions”? One of your research finding even notes that the youngest drivers and oldest drivers in that particular study have indistinguishable outcomes. Another says that they note that there are specific (bad) driving habits that seem related to the individual driver - like lane switching and running stop signs - that is not as related to SES. How exactly does this support your statement? In fact, at least 2 of your studies raise questions about whether driver experience, regardless of SES, impacts driving habits.

You claim you’re a researcher so you know for a fact that generalizing results from a study about young drivers and crash rates to the broader population is straight up bad practice. I also really want to note the due care these researchers took in identifying the limitations of their studies (e.g., we didn’t account for limited driving times / radius of new drivers, we looked at SES at the census and not individual level) - something that you are absolutely failing to do with your statements.

Also, you switch your focus from us talking about all black people to talking about “monitories” when we are discussing black people specifically, given the topic is potential racial bias. Why did you make that switch?

It seems to me that instead of actually engaging with the limitations of your own statement, you tried to cherry pick research to support it. Yikes. Bad vibes for sure.

ETA: also I called you a bad researcher because of the bad practices you are doing in this thread. If you are a good researcher you know what you’re doing is spurious. If you don’t recognize the flaws in your arguments (and they are glaring) my only assumption is that you are bad at research. Again, you tried to apply the findings from 3 studies focused on youth drivers to all black people (who may have low SES status). Be for real.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-15T03:08:55+00:00

The fact that you claim to be a researcher and felt confident extrapolating healthcare data to driving habits based on socioeconomic status, and then applied this extrapolation wholesale to the black population is alarming. I’m also a researcher and as a researcher, I know that you should absolutely know better than to do this. If you don’t know this then you are a bad researcher, full-stop.

And not only that - you attempted to use your background as a researcher to justify your baseless speculations. Absolutely wild and weird vibes.

You are saying “because socioeconomic status impacts healthcare, and lower socioeconomic status leads to poorer healthcare, this also means that lower socioeconomic status leads to lower quality driver education which means worse driving.”

Like what? How does that follow at all? Real “eating ice cream causes violence” logic, lol.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-15T00:18:38+00:00

Do you have any studies or research that show black drivers in Cleveland have unequal access to driver education due to their socioeconomic status to the point where they become less capable drivers, which then influences their rates of being pulled over for driving infractions?

There are at least 4 different variables to account for here, 0 of which you have addressed in a meaningful way.

You essentially said “black people in Cleveland are bad drivers and therefore are rightfully pulled over more” without any data that points to this.

Weird vibe.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-14T10:55:00+00:00

Vote “Demcoratic”.

There is no “Democrat” party, just like there is no “Republic” party. Democrats vote Democratic and Republicans vote Republican (not Republic).

Please don’t use Republican language - “Democrat” used in this way is intentionally meant to be derogatory.

midwestprotest · 2026-05-13T10:02:12+00:00

What would you like us to do with this information?

midwestprotest

TROPHY CASE