> A laughable question from someone peddling baseless conspiracy theories. Common sense and simple observation of the world around me.
and a laughable response from you. I presented my evidence. You failed to do so and decide to fall back on "common sense and simple observation".
>Those polls (we seem to be straying dangerously close to "the blacks and the jews" level of hateful conspiracy theory, by the way) are not evidence for the cause of the creation of this legislation, nor even attempt any semblance of cause and effect.
Your best response to the survey data is dismiss it saying it's tantamount to racism?
>It might also help you get some perspective to keep in mind that those in actual positions of power (that's not Bob the unemployed coal miner from West Virginia who didn't finish highschool and goes to church once a week), spend considerable resources curating and influencing public opinion to their end.
We literally still have "in god we trust" on our bills, added back in the 50s, despite being a secular country. Several states pushed creationism to be taught in schools as an alternative to creationism. I think you're underestimating how much impact evangelicals have.
>Consider, for example how many people were deluded into believing the baseless conspiracy theory that there existed ample evidence which proved Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election.
"hacked"? maybe not. Interfered? definitely.
>The FBI's work was taken over in May 2017 by former FBI director Robert Mueller, who led a Special Counsel investigation until March 2019.[3] Mueller concluded that Russian interference was "sweeping and systematic" and "violated U.S. criminal law", and he indicted twenty-six Russian citizens and three Russian organizations. [...] The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee submitted the first in their five-volume 1,313-page report in July 2019 in which they concluded that the January 2017 intelligence community assessment alleging Russian interference was "coherent and well-constructed". The first volume also concluded that the assessment was "proper", learning from analysts that there was "no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions".