For those who ever wondered if putting a Repubican/right-wing extracurricular was a good idea...don't

[Anonymous]

Whatever. The kid I know who was big in “Turning Point USA” got into UVA OOS, and the kid who interned for Tommy Tubberviile got into Harvard law. You right wingers are not the victims you pretend to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love that the OPs recommendation is you need to omit your kids Cato credential because an unhinged 23 year old might ding his application because of it.

That's the problem...the unhinged admission's officer is the one who decides if your kid is admitted.

We're big on unconscious racism, implicit bias, etc. There are entire DEI industries set up around those theories.

Now here, it seems plausible, does it not, that the explicit bias of an admssion's officer might negatively impact the application?

That’s not a “problem.” It is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology.

Sincere question - was it also acceptable to reject someone from admission for supporting McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012?

Explain how that is the same thing to me like I am 5.

PP said “it is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology”. I am trying to test the scope of that assertion with historical elections.

It isn’t a good faith test. (Acting in bad faith is typical behavior for right wingers so I guess that fits).

Let me rephrase: How are McCain and/or Romney like Trump/MAGA? For one thing, Romney is on record many times in opposition to Trump on both style and substance.

So, again, make this analogy make sense. Because I dispute the premise of the question.

McCain supported all the wars Bush supported and then added even more. He selected a Bircher/religious right nutjob as his running mate. It was absolutely not socially acceptable to support McCain in 2008. You are huffing fumes or very young if you think so.

This is what I thought. Appreciate the confirmation.

That's somebody else.

If you don't understand how we were in a different environment when John McCain ran against Obama, you don't understand why your question/test is in bad faith.

McCain and Romney were/are, at least, fundamentally decent men. Supporting them would not be an immediate disqualifier the way backing Trump is today. Everyone who supports Trump hates Jesus and America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://nypost.com/2024/10/18/media/college-admissions-officer-rails-against-trump-supporters-in-social-media-post-piece-of-s/

College admissions officer accuses Trump supporters of tolerating ‘rape,’ ‘homophobia’ in social post: ‘Piece of s–t’

While not every admission's officer is going to be from a background in the humanities, if you have a child doing a Republican/righ-wing internship, advocacy or leadership position, I would really think twice about putting that down as an EC. Too much to lose and probably very little to gain. Obviously this isn't for every school, but for SLAC's, the Boston schools, Emory, WashU, etc. it does apply.

This is a perfectly valid reason to reject a kid.

It's also problematic for getting a job in the real world. For good reason.

goes both ways although republicans tend to not be as biased. Reminds me why living in DC is so hard to stomach at times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love that the OPs recommendation is you need to omit your kids Cato credential because an unhinged 23 year old might ding his application because of it.

That's the problem...the unhinged admission's officer is the one who decides if your kid is admitted.

We're big on unconscious racism, implicit bias, etc. There are entire DEI industries set up around those theories.

Now here, it seems plausible, does it not, that the explicit bias of an admssion's officer might negatively impact the application?

That’s not a “problem.” It is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology.

Sincere question - was it also acceptable to reject someone from admission for supporting McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012?

Explain how that is the same thing to me like I am 5.

PP said “it is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology”. I am trying to test the scope of that assertion with historical elections.

It isn’t a good faith test. (Acting in bad faith is typical behavior for right wingers so I guess that fits).

Let me rephrase: How are McCain and/or Romney like Trump/MAGA? For one thing, Romney is on record many times in opposition to Trump on both style and substance.

So, again, make this analogy make sense. Because I dispute the premise of the question.

McCain supported all the wars Bush supported and then added even more. He selected a Bircher/religious right nutjob as his running mate. It was absolutely not socially acceptable to support McCain in 2008. You are huffing fumes or very young if you think so.

But he wasn't a lying convicted felon, rapist cult leader who attacked the peaceful transfer of power, a basic tenet of our democracy, by inciting an insurrection.

This time is DIFFERENT.
We're facing the most EXTREME Republican nominee EVER.
This is the MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF OUR LIFETIMES.

You libs are like a broken record every four years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love that the OPs recommendation is you need to omit your kids Cato credential because an unhinged 23 year old might ding his application because of it.

That's the problem...the unhinged admission's officer is the one who decides if your kid is admitted.

We're big on unconscious racism, implicit bias, etc. There are entire DEI industries set up around those theories.

Now here, it seems plausible, does it not, that the explicit bias of an admssion's officer might negatively impact the application?

That’s not a “problem.” It is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology.

Sincere question - was it also acceptable to reject someone from admission for supporting McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012?

Explain how that is the same thing to me like I am 5.

PP said “it is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology”. I am trying to test the scope of that assertion with historical elections.

It isn’t a good faith test. (Acting in bad faith is typical behavior for right wingers so I guess that fits).

Let me rephrase: How are McCain and/or Romney like Trump/MAGA? For one thing, Romney is on record many times in opposition to Trump on both style and substance.

So, again, make this analogy make sense. Because I dispute the premise of the question.

McCain supported all the wars Bush supported and then added even more. He selected a Bircher/religious right nutjob as his running mate. It was absolutely not socially acceptable to support McCain in 2008. You are huffing fumes or very young if you think so.

But he wasn't a lying convicted felon, rapist cult leader who attacked the peaceful transfer of power, a basic tenet of our democracy, by inciting an insurrection.

Yawn, always off-topic, furiously tossing the ad hominem attacks around. I’m interested in your thoughts on McCain ca. Keating Five.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All kids should be aware that being conservative in today's climate will negatively impact them, especially in college. Best to keep your political leanings neutral/private unless left-leaning. Young people should also be more cognizant of their SM use, my kid as posted a total of 6 times in 6 years on Instagram. Nothing will happen to this person, they will be back on the payroll soon if not already.

How about step back and consider whether the views and behavior you are cloaking in conservatism are actually conservatism or is it the morally corrupt, anger and hate driven populism of Trump/Vance masquerading as conservatism. It’s one thing to be conservative on tax policy but chanting to support mass deportations, hating women, LGTBQ, non white races and non Christian religions or happily enabling those who do is an entirely different matter. The GOP is mired in very ugly populism akin to the Nazi movement in 1930s Germany.

NP-Case in point, as OP stated, if you're conservative, keep it to yourself in college.

Only a part of the paragraph describes conservatives -- the other is not a political position, it is morally bankrupt and anti-American. If you can't see that, then you seriously do not understand what the party of Trump is actually up to, and it is past time for you to wake up. It's not OK.

You've posted enough drivel today to show you are not to be taken seriously. Now go back to your cushy GS-10 job and earn your pay Govie.

Should have put NP; that was my first post, and clearly it touched a nerve.

I've never worked for the government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love that the OPs recommendation is you need to omit your kids Cato credential because an unhinged 23 year old might ding his application because of it.

That's the problem...the unhinged admission's officer is the one who decides if your kid is admitted.

We're big on unconscious racism, implicit bias, etc. There are entire DEI industries set up around those theories.

Now here, it seems plausible, does it not, that the explicit bias of an admssion's officer might negatively impact the application?

That’s not a “problem.” It is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology.

Sincere question - was it also acceptable to reject someone from admission for supporting McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012?

Explain how that is the same thing to me like I am 5.

PP said “it is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology”. I am trying to test the scope of that assertion with historical elections.

It isn’t a good faith test. (Acting in bad faith is typical behavior for right wingers so I guess that fits).

Let me rephrase: How are McCain and/or Romney like Trump/MAGA? For one thing, Romney is on record many times in opposition to Trump on both style and substance.

So, again, make this analogy make sense. Because I dispute the premise of the question.

McCain supported all the wars Bush supported and then added even more. He selected a Bircher/religious right nutjob as his running mate. It was absolutely not socially acceptable to support McCain in 2008. You are huffing fumes or very young if you think so.

But he wasn't a lying convicted felon, rapist cult leader who attacked the peaceful transfer of power, a basic tenet of our democracy, by inciting an insurrection.

This time is DIFFERENT.
We're facing the most EXTREME Republican nominee EVER.
This is the MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF OUR LIFETIMES.

You libs are like a broken record every four years.

DP

This is definitely a case of both sides do it.

You don't think the right tries to create the same story if hysteria as the left? The left just had more to work with right now.

[Anonymous]

Just lie and say you believe men give birth, Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, more gay porn in kindergarten, and you support boys dominating girls in sports. You’ll walk in anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love that the OPs recommendation is you need to omit your kids Cato credential because an unhinged 23 year old might ding his application because of it.

That's the problem...the unhinged admission's officer is the one who decides if your kid is admitted.

We're big on unconscious racism, implicit bias, etc. There are entire DEI industries set up around those theories.

Now here, it seems plausible, does it not, that the explicit bias of an admssion's officer might negatively impact the application?

That’s not a “problem.” It is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology.

Sincere question - was it also acceptable to reject someone from admission for supporting McCain in 2008 or Romney in 2012?

Explain how that is the same thing to me like I am 5.

PP said “it is perfectly acceptable to reject someone for associating with right-wing ideology”. I am trying to test the scope of that assertion with historical elections.

It isn’t a good faith test. (Acting in bad faith is typical behavior for right wingers so I guess that fits).

Let me rephrase: How are McCain and/or Romney like Trump/MAGA? For one thing, Romney is on record many times in opposition to Trump on both style and substance.

So, again, make this analogy make sense. Because I dispute the premise of the question.

McCain supported all the wars Bush supported and then added even more. He selected a Bircher/religious right nutjob as his running mate. It was absolutely not socially acceptable to support McCain in 2008. You are huffing fumes or very young if you think so.

It certainly was before Palin. The nutter sunk him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just lie and say you believe men give birth, Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, more gay porn in kindergarten, and you support boys dominating girls in sports. You’ll walk in anywhere.

The fact you (and my Fox News watching parents) this is what liberals think is a perfect encapsulation of how broken things are. The media you consume is lying to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://nypost.com/2024/10/18/media/college-admissions-officer-rails-against-trump-supporters-in-social-media-post-piece-of-s/

College admissions officer accuses Trump supporters of tolerating ‘rape,’ ‘homophobia’ in social post: ‘Piece of s–t’

While not every admission's officer is going to be from a background in the humanities, if you have a child doing a Republican/righ-wing internship, advocacy or leadership position, I would really think twice about putting that down as an EC. Too much to lose and probably very little to gain. Obviously this isn't for every school, but for SLAC's, the Boston schools, Emory, WashU, etc. it does apply.

This is a perfectly valid reason to reject a kid.

It's also problematic for getting a job in the real world. For good reason.

goes both ways although republicans tend to not be as biased. Reminds me why living in DC is so hard to stomach at times.

You lost everyone at Republicans are not biased. Bias is Trump's platform!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://nypost.com/2024/10/18/media/college-admissions-officer-rails-against-trump-supporters-in-social-media-post-piece-of-s/

College admissions officer accuses Trump supporters of tolerating ‘rape,’ ‘homophobia’ in social post: ‘Piece of s–t’

While not every admission's officer is going to be from a background in the humanities, if you have a child doing a Republican/righ-wing internship, advocacy or leadership position, I would really think twice about putting that down as an EC. Too much to lose and probably very little to gain. Obviously this isn't for every school, but for SLAC's, the Boston schools, Emory, WashU, etc. it does apply.

This is a perfectly valid reason to reject a kid.

It's also problematic for getting a job in the real world. For good reason.

goes both ways although republicans tend to not be as biased. Reminds me why living in DC is so hard to stomach at times.

You lost everyone at Republicans are not biased. Bias is Trump's platform!

Doesn’t he already have plans for his enemies? Even his Republican “enemies”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just lie and say you believe men give birth, Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, more gay porn in kindergarten, and you support boys dominating girls in sports. You’ll walk in anywhere.

Republican hysterics at their finest. GFY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just lie and say you believe men give birth, Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, more gay porn in kindergarten, and you support boys dominating girls in sports. You’ll walk in anywhere.

The fact you (and my Fox News watching parents) this is what liberals think is a perfect encapsulation of how broken things are. The media you consume is lying to you.

I’ve seen it all supported by liberals, not through Fox. Nice try. And if you think CNN, WaPo, CBS etc. are honest you are high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just lie and say you believe men give birth, Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, more gay porn in kindergarten, and you support boys dominating girls in sports. You’ll walk in anywhere.

The fact you (and my Fox News watching parents) this is what liberals think is a perfect encapsulation of how broken things are. The media you consume is lying to you.

The part that is broken is that the PP doesn’t GAF about truth.

He will happily eat up all of the lies and then joyfully spew out a bunch of BS himself.