I don't care that you don't care about African countries or the performance of blacks in different times and places than modern-day USA. If the facts are inconvenient to you, provide data to refute it or suck it up.

My point from the very beginning was that you can't extrapolate the problems of Baltimore out to the rest of the country, and that every city run by Democrats experience similar problems with crime; that it's not purely racial. Even so, you keep trying to re-frame the argument to being about race and race alone in order to exclude the broader base of facts.

Cities don't track crime data by ethnicity so you have to analyze overall crime rates and ethnic makeup for each city and compare them to discern patterns:

• Portland, OR = Top 1% of cities with most crime (population: 641,162, black population: 5.7%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1980

• Seattle, WA = Top 1% of cities with most crime (population: 733,919, black population: 6.9%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1969

• San Francisco, CA = Top 2% of cities with most crime (population: 815,201, black population: 4.9%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1964

• Baltimore, MD = Top 3% of cities with most crime (population: 576,498, black population: 61.6%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1967

It logically follows that if black population were disproportionately responsible for crime AND the most significant factor to consider when it comes to crime rate, then the above statistics would be anomalous. The pattern just doesn't match. This means there are other factors such as political policies, culture, income, etc. This is backed up by all the other data that I shared with you that you so conveniently decided that you "don't care about".

There are plenty of anecdotal examples of crime rates dropping when a Republican is elected (such as the Rudy Giuliani example) and crime rates rising when a Democrat is elected. This makes sense with the Republicans platform being strong on "rule of law" issues, and Democrats being notorious for their "soft" approach to law enforcement. It used to be a truism that voters elect Republicans when they're scared and Democrats when they're safe.

There aren't many large Republican cities because Democrats tend to be urban and Republicans tend to be rural, but here are the stats for the five largest cities that could be considered Republican cities (current mayor and at least 3 out of the 5 last mayors were Republican), which also happen to also be mid-sized cities comparable to the Democrat cities mentioned above:

• Oklahoma City, OK = Top 4% of cities with most crime (population: 687,725, black population: 14.2%) -- Current mayor and 5 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Miami, FL = Top 8% of cities with most crime (population: 439,890, black population: 14%) - Current mayor and 3 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Jacksonville, FL = Top 8% of cities with most crime (population: 954,614, black population: 30.4%) -- Current mayor and 4 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Fort Worth, TX = Top 9% of cities with most crime (population: 935,508, black population: 18.2%) -- Current mayor and 3 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Mesa, AZ = Top 17% of cities with most crime (population: 509,475, black population: 4.2%) -- Current mayor and 5 of the last 5 mayors were Republican

All of the cities with the highest crime are Democrat-controlled cities, regardless of size or ethnic makeup.

As I keep saying time and time again, crime rates are way more complicated than a single factor, and are impacted significantly by political and law enforcement policy. This claim that crime rates such as those in Baltimore are primarily due to the racial makeup of the city is incredibly narrow-sighted.

Crime rates don't correlate to race anywhere near as strongly as you believe. The Portuguese have a far lower crime rate than the Italians. Poland has far lower crime rates than France. Zambia and Botswana have lower crime rates than many European countries. The crime rate in South Africa is twice that of Zambia. Crime in China and Japan both have very low crime rates compared to southeast Asia. Venezuela has one of the highest crime rate in the world, while Paraguay has one of the lowest. Of course you don't care about any of this because it's inconvenient for you.

If you want to claim that native-born blacks in the USA are over-represented in the crime statistics overall relative to whites and Asians, then you're correct. The data backs this up. If you want to claim that native-born blacks in the USA have a stronger propensity for violent crime than white or Asians, then you're correct. The data supports this as well. If you want to claim that Baltimore has high crime primarily because of the black population, then you'd be wrong. If you want to claim any city with a high percentage black population will have high crime relative to that percentage, then you'd be wrong. If you want to claim Republican-controlled cities have the same levels of crime as Democrat-controlled cities, you'd be wrong.

I don't care that you don't care about African countries or the performance of blacks in different times and places than modern-day USA. If the facts are inconvenient to you, provide data to refute it or suck it up.

My point from the very beginning was that you can't extrapolate the problems of Baltimore out to the rest of the country, and that every city run by Democrats experience similar problems with crime; that it's not purely racial. Even so, you keep trying to re-frame the argument to being about race and race alone in order to exclude the broader base of facts.

Cities don't track crime data by ethnicity so you have to analyze overall crime rates and ethnic makeup for each city and compare them to discern patterns:

• Portland, OR = Top 1% of cities with most crime (population: 641,162, black population: 5.7%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1980

• Seattle, WA = Top 1% of cities with most crime (population: 733,919, black population: 6.9%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1969

• San Francisco, CA = Top 2% of cities with most crime (population: 815,201, black population: 4.9%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1964

• Baltimore, MD = Top 3% of cities with most crime (population: 576,498, black population: 61.6%) -- All Democrat mayors since 1967

It logically follows that if black population were disproportionately responsible for crime AND the most significant factor to consider when it comes to crime rate, then the above statistics would be anomalous. The pattern just doesn't match. This means there are other factors such as political policies, culture, income, etc. This is backed up by all the other data that I shared with you that you so conveniently decided that you "don't care about".

There are plenty of anecdotal examples of crime rates dropping when a Republican is elected (such as the Rudy Giuliani example) and crime rates rising when a Democrat is elected. This makes sense with the Republicans platform being strong on "rule of law" issues, and Democrats being notorious for their "soft" approach to law enforcement. It used to be a truism that voters elect Republicans when they're scared and Democrats when they're safe.

There aren't many large Republican cities because Democrats tend to be urban and Republicans tend to be rural, but here are the stats for the five largest cities that could be considered Republican cities (current mayor and at least 3 out of the 5 last mayors were Republican), which also happen to also be mid-sized cities comparable to the Democrat cities mentioned above:

• Oklahoma City, OK = Top 4% of cities with most crime (population: 687,725, black population: 14.2%) -- Current mayor and 5 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Miami, FL = Top 8% of cities with most crime (population: 439,890, black population: 14%) - Current mayor and 3 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Jacksonville, FL = Top 8% of cities with most crime (population: 954,614, black population: 30.4%) -- Current mayor and 4 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Fort Worth, TX = Top 9% of cities with most crime (population: 935,508, black population: 18.2%) -- Current mayor and 3 out of the last 5 mayors were Republican

• Mesa, AZ = Top 17% of cities with most crime (population: 509,475, black population: 4.2%) -- Current mayor and 5 of the last 5 mayors were Republican

All of the cities with the highest crime are Democrat-controlled cities, regardless of size or ethnic makeup.

As I keep saying time and time again, crime rates are way more complicated than a single factor, and are impacted significantly by political and law enforcement policy. This claim that crime rates such as those in Baltimore are primarily due to the racial makeup of the city is incredibly narrow-sighted.

Crime rates don't correlate to race anywhere near as strongly as you believe. The Portuguese have a far lower crime rate than the Italians. Poland has far lower crime rates than France. Zambia and Botswana have lower crime rates than many European countries. The crime rate in South African is twice that of Zambia. Crime in China and Japan both have very low crime rates compared to southeast Asia. Venezuela has one of the highest crime rate in the world, while Paraguay has one of the lowest. Of course you don't care about any of this because it's inconvenient for you.

If you want to claim that native-born blacks in the USA are over-represented in the crime statistics overall relative to whites and Asians, then you're correct. The data backs this up. If you want to claim that native-born blacks in the USA have a stronger propensity for violent crime than white or Asians, then you're correct. The data supports this up as well. If you want to claim that Baltimore has high crime primarily because of the black population, then you'd be wrong. If you want to claim any city with a high percentage black population will have high crime relative to that percentage, then you'd be wrong. If you want to claim Republican-controlled cities have the same levels of crime as Democrat-controlled cities, you'd be wrong.