oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
cal83dls79 said:
oski003 said:
Big C said:
oski003 said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
oski003 said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
cal83dls79 said:
movielover said:
did you even bother to read the replies to this? Of course not, dumb question . All saying the opposite! lol.
movielover mode on>
It's on X and it has a picture of Trump, so it must be true!
<movielover mode off>
I have every confidence that my political views played no role in any Congressional death. I've never even met any of them.
Because of your political views, you keep your head in the sand and think it is normal for 6 out of 212 Congressmen to die in one year. That's unfortunate.
Considering their age, doesn't that number actually seem small?
No, the median age of the House is 57.5, and the median age of the much smaller Senate is 64.7. For comparison,, how many Congressman total died from 2010-2019? Note that Congress's median age is younger now than previous years.
really need to look at age distribution with is heaviest by far in the boomer (69) and above age ranges in both houses. And yes, those folks are dying.
Has the age distribution changed much between 2010-19 and the last 12 months? Democratic Congressmen, in the last 12 months, are dying at a rate 10 times the Congressional death rate of the decade before Covid.
why don't you research the delta in the distribution from 2010-2019 and get back to me. This is of such great interest to me and you!
why don't you research your "explanation," which is a hypothetical delta in the distribution from 2010-2019, and get back to me.
that's what delta is oh boy, change. There may be a delta there may not be a delta and what is it? That's what your original question was, remember? This is what your research will bear out. TIA for the results.
Sorry you can't back your "explanation" with facts. Better luck next time.
it was the question you originally posed to support your thesis. So you still have yet to provide that answer. Looking forward to the research results. Thanks
No, I didn't. I only questioned you when you stated we "really need to look at age distribution" after you hypothesized that Congressmen are older now than ten years ago despite having a lower median age (which is a fact I posted).
Did you find out anything to support what appears to be your hypothesis?
you specifically suggested "distribution" which is different than median but you used them interchangeably….distribution is more granular analysis of the ages on other side of the median.
Did you find out anything or are you going to continue to speak with an empty hypothesis?
I'll look into it after you get to 200 deals on the bingo card and trumps peace efforts in Ukraine and Gaza become reality beyond a tweet by movie. Is he/she your date to the meme coin dinner?
Why would I get to those? I rarely even participate in discussions on those subjects. Is this something else you have imagined?
at over 13k posts I find that hard to believe, but if you say so.
I see this is your way of taking the L in our discussion. Carry on.
the L I took was my inability to convince you that a decrease in median age may not necessarily mean there less folks on deaths door.
Yes, it is hard to convince someone when you don't offer anything to support your argument. Next time try to do so. This isn't Chico State.
it's a possible mathematical outcome:
Yes, it's possible for the median age to decrease while the average age increases. This can happen when there's a shift in the age distribution, particularly if the population has a large group of younger individuals at the bottom of the age spectrum. Maybe you can't grasp that?
I never said this was a fact. I also never stated that it wasn't, but asked for your analysis of the data as it was part of your thesis and wild be interesting to know.
Priest of the Patty Hearst Shrine