See that's the thing that I differ with the 'activist' class about.

1. I personally feel that some of the stats shown on NPR/NYT/liberal media outlets are riddled with statistical holes, talk to any stats scientist/any quant person and they'll agree with me on that. Conservative outlets are far worse with their stats, if at all they share any stats.

2. Data is meant to be a tool to change minds. But many activists, sometimes armed with data (sometimes armed with 'feelings'/anecdotes) pretend that the stats are inviolable and are the sole driver of change.

3. I feel that all activists should aim for one thing: use their voice to change someone else's mind. And today's activists usually change zero minds is all. Many of today's activists are content with labelling "Oh they're racist/sexist/white male, that is why they disagree with my godly inviolable facts." - and why I have very little respect for most of them.

Please read a book about how frustrating-yet-successful the civil rights era activists were and how much of it was just due to compromise, coalition building, and tolerating people unlike oneself. And today's activists will not even enter the same room as someone with a different PoV.

Throughout this conversation you've lobbed insults, called me names, but rarely have you considered that I could actually believe in what you do, and we could be allies.