There was a feeling of impending doom here in The Villages before the election night. A lot of people didn't buy into the certainty of a Romney victory, and they were desperate to convince all to vote for him. I actually felt sorrow for Romney as his hope of the Presidency was lost forever dashing a dream he had yearned for so badly.

Oh, another comment from the Gang of Six. Well, Six Pac-Man, it is time you learn the old, antiquated beliefs do not matter anymore. National demographics show you and your fellow old men cronies are non sequiturs. You find your bridge and get under it.

Now, it is a beautiful day in The Villages. Time for golf and enjoying this day.

PERSONAL BEST REGARDS.

Someone please explain who or what the "gang of six" means. Thank you, and please details because I asked before and the only response was very evasive.

Troll: someone who posts to start arguments and inflame people. You fit the description to a tee. You clearly have nothing to contribute and as such are of no consequence.

Think you are correct. I got a pm explaining the "gang of six" and checked on the names given me and most do not even post any longer, one for more than a year. So "gang of six" joins the "faux news" as clear indications we have a troll !!!

You forgot your normal insult about old white guys dying off ... are you nor your normal nasty self today?

The guy who always posts using this term is off a bit mentally ... ie really

Just curious. How did someone PM you if all the comments are by GUEST?

Is there a way of knowing who is posting what?

My question also. I think the admin should address this as well as other identity for lack of a better word, flaws, in the "guest" proviso.

Didn't simply ask on this forum. I also asked in a PM, and got an answer. Whomever is posting it here has quite a rep according to what I was told

IMO, the gang of six is down to the gang of three or four at the most. There were a few self-inflicted gun shot wounds after the last election, just saying.

Actually, if you mean some of them were banned, ALL of them are listed as active members, and from what I have been told, those who found it necessary to attack them are the ones who were asked to leave.

I just know EVERY name of that group given to me is still here and could post anytime. NOT ONE has been thrown.

Rather inappropriate humor, or attempt there at, in this instance.

This gang of six thing seems to be some type of legacy TOTV folklore or something. I have no idea what people are talking about except I do note that one poster in particular seems to rail against them regularly. I really think the railer has some type of mental disturbance ... not sure if it was caused by the gang or they just exacerbate his underlying medical condition

The "gang" is a manifestation and only exist in the mind of the predjudiced "railer".
A master of diversion, deception, red herrings and lateral arabesque platitudes.

Go back and read the posts from 2012, prior to the time the political forum was shut down, and you will see that your post is totally untrue.

I don't have to go back I was there.
And the same unexplained paranoia with those who disagreed with or did not alighn with or subscribe to certain posters opinions/preferences/choices existed then.
Nothing more than a personal rationalization of a biased position. A categorization of convenience to aggregate those who differ in thoughts/opinions/positions/politics.
No change. Same reasoning today.

They are still here and talk to themselves all day, cut and paste champs along with the white sheet award winners. Their tea party is proud of them!

I'm sorry I forgot. When the political forum was closed due to abuse by the gang of six, one picked up his marbles and left pouting. Good riddance! There are at least five of them talking among themselves and they have been spreading the same lies since bush ran the first time. One is extremely active and considers themselves to be the grand pubah of all the forums in the villages!

As the original poster I am disappointed, though not surprised, that no one has addressed the premise of the posted essay. As usual, nothing of substance or critical thinking here, or anywhere in this useless forum.

I think you got a number of rational responses to your OP. Problem is two fold. The author who wrote an OPINION piece offered no FACTS to check in his premise. He presented a few statistical statistics but did not appear to even make an attempt to try to support his basic premise. There are a number of other essays who take the other side of this ongoing issue, I also might ask if you read this gentleman background, and a few of his statements, but that is for another day I suppose.

Fact checking is in the eye of the beholder any more. I suggest, since you have interest that you might read this study which is taking place because of the fallacy of fact checking in todays age,

Getting it Right: Fact-Checking in the Digital Age - American Journalism Review