ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , republican party , republicans

Reply
Old 2nd October 2019, 06:49 PM   #121
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,598
Originally Posted by theprestige
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
Do you think Trump is like a master baker?
Yes.

Quote:
There are different ways to bake the cake, depending on what sort of cake you want. Different flavoring, different temperatures, different ingredients yield different types of cake, and the president as the master baker is testing recipes and deciding what type of cake he wants.

-White House senior official

This week he kneads a dill dough.
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 06:56 PM   #122
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Resolved: Trump Era Republicans Are Uniquely Bad in American Political History

Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Oh well, since we're dragging conspiracy theories into this... No, sorry, I'm not interested in going down that BS rabbit hole. The source of the rumour was GOP candidate Andy Martin, a big fan of numerous conspiracy theories; and the one Clinton campaign staffer who circulated it was subsequently fired. Guess who was the biggest promoter of Birtherism? Oh that's right, Donald Trump and the mainstream GOP.



So, clearly you have nothing but BS conspiracy theories and half-assed attempts at whataboutism to contribute, and I can safely ignore you from here on out. Thanks for that.


Nope. I didn’t say Clinton staffers were the source of the rumor. I said they circulated it. And they did. That one was fired does not negate the fact that they were a Democrat. And the other Clinton associate who helped spread the rumor was Sidney Blumenthal. As I said, people outside the GOP trafficked in this piece of BS, so it’s not something confined to the GOP. Yes, Trump was a big supporter of the BS but I’ve already conceded that Trump is bad.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 2nd October 2019 at 07:03 PM.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 06:48 AM   #123
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12,387
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Nope. I didn’t say Clinton staffers were the source of the rumor. I said they circulated it. And they did. That one was fired does not negate the fact that they were a Democrat. And the other Clinton associate who helped spread the rumor was Sidney Blumenthal.
Once again, you're accepting disputed or unverified accounts as factual.

Here's a couple of links you can use to educate yourself:

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...clinton-228304

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...n-obama-228388

Quote:
As I said, people outside the GOP trafficked in this piece of BS, so it’s not something confined to the GOP.
There's a galaxy of difference between maybe a couple of random people who happen to be Democrats flirting with the idea behind the scenes, and a Republican presidential candidate making public proclamations.

Quote:
Yes, Trump was a big supporter of the BS but I’ve already conceded that Trump is bad.
Now that we officially have that concession, all that's left for you to do is stop pretending that Trump and the GOP are somehow unconnected.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 06:52 AM   #124
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
"The GOP is uniquely bad," is an assertion. "The GOP espouses birtherism," is an assertion. In the former case, an assertion is all it can ever be, for reasons discussed by others in this thread. In the latter, an appeal to "common knowledge," is not appropriate. In fact, it's widely-known (as long as we are indulging "common knowledge" arguments) that the existing rumors of his supposed Kenyan birth were circulated by members of Hillary Clinton's campaign and considered as ammo to use against him. There were also plenty of people on that bandwagon that weren't members of the GOP so you can't even say this is a uniquely republican thing -more a whackadoodle thing. Sure, you can argue that the Tea Party republicans were big on this, but they are hardly representative of the GOP as a whole.

Similar for Trump's claims of "Illegal voting;" that's a Trump thing not a GOP-as-a-whole thing.

I've also been told that the GOP is "carrying his water" and enabling him. That's another one of those assertions that will be very hard to back up. Paul Ryan stepped down because of Trump and many GOP congresscritters are retiring in his wake. They may not want to impeach him because of the damage it will do to the party as a whole but that certainly does not imply that the GOP supports, buys into or otherwise enables Trump's nonsense.
Are you seriously suggesting that Trump's birtherism is Hillary's fault?

Is there nothing that idiot can do that's his own fault?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 07:38 AM   #125
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Are you seriously suggesting that Trump's birtherism is Hillary's fault?



Is there nothing that idiot can do that's his own fault?


Nope.

See it doesn’t matter what I actually say, my perceived conservatism/GOP support will always color my words in people’s minds.

The only thing I said there was that people who were not GOP were involved in circulating these rumors; thus, it’s not an exclusively GOP thing. Never said it was Hillary’s fault or that Trump wasn’t an idiot.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 07:40 AM   #126
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Nope.

See it doesn’t matter what I actually say, my perceived conservatism/GOP support will always color my words in people’s minds.

The only thing I said there was that people who were not GOP were involved in circulating these rumors; thus, it’s not an exclusively GOP thing. Never said it was Hillary’s fault or that Trump wasn’t an idiot.
Yes I saw your clarification. Sorry for the confusion.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 07:48 AM   #127
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,478
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
There's a galaxy of difference between maybe a couple of random people who happen to be Democrats flirting with the idea behind the scenes, and a Republican presidential candidate making public proclamations.
I agree, and the following fact in no way negates your broader point.

You may recall in the 2008 primaries that a picture of Obama in Somali garb was circulated. That came from a high level within the Clinton campaign. And when exposed, they defended it with an appalling GOP-like fake explanation.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 08:03 AM   #128
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,002
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I agree, and the following fact in no way negates your broader point.

You may recall in the 2008 primaries that a picture of Obama in Somali garb was circulated. That came from a high level within the Clinton campaign. And when exposed, they defended it with an appalling GOP-like fake explanation.
I had actually forgotten that birtherism was such a hilariously bad example of the uniqueness of the modern GOP.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 09:01 AM   #129
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
I really don't like it when arguments devolve into definitional pedantry, but dude... seriously?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concession
Conceded

But context is important. In the context of a debate, to say that someone conceded is to say that they argued one point but then conceded that that point was wrong. My very first post in this thread basically stipulated that Trump is bad so I think "conceded" is an improper use. Minor quibble.

Quote:
The same one you were pushing seven years ago when you insisted over the course of several pages that a downward trend in unemployment was actually an upward trend: Defend all things Republican and attack all things Democrat, facts and reality be damned.
Wow, that was awhile back. Time proved me wrong on that front and I'm happy to admit it. Even in that thread, I altered my arguments when presented with new information. I was still wrong though. In various other threads, I have admitted that my initial criticism of Obama was unfounded; I consider him a good President even though I don't like some things he did.

Quote:
Your idea of a good argument is what someone with the same ideology as yours posts on their blog.
Unfounded. In any case, enough about me as a poster. Why not just stick to things I say in this thread without attempting a hot reading based on arguments I made years ago?

Quote:
Raise your standards, and then maybe we can have an actual discussion.

Trump is the GOP, whether you want to accept it or not. The GOP gave him the nomination. The GOP elected him President
The people elected him President through the electoral college.
Quote:
The GOP does his bidding.
Biased source. I'm sure you can do better than that.

I kid! But I will note that BI is certainly using loaded words to make run-of-the-mill political stuff sound like the Republicans are, as you put it, "doing his bidding." What the GOP is doing is defending the current President who is a member of their party and the GOP is certainly not unique in that respect and I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this.
Quote:
You want to separate Trump from the GOP? Let me know when they make any real effort to hold him accountable.
That's an argument from silence. Much of the GOP is trying to keep him in check behind the scenes without launching a coup against a President of their own party. If they can weather the Trump Presidency, maybe they have a chance of keeping their party intact. I don't really agree with them but I also don't think that makes them evil enablers doing Trump's bidding.

Quote:
It's not about sides, but rather the nature of the claim.

If someone tells me it's raining, I probably don't need to have that confirmed with additional data.

If someone tells me it's raining cocktail wieners, I might need to take a look for myself.
The nature of those claims is very simple and factual. If someone said it was raining cocktail wieners, I wouldn't even bother taking a look because I know they are lying -that simply does not happen. If the claim is "Trump is a member of the GOP," that's nice and easy.

Quote:
That you want to start from the disingenuous position of feigning ignorance about how far the GOP has bent over backwards to enable Trump and insist that we "prove" it to you is silly.
That isn't a simple factual claim anymore. That's 1)a complex claim with a lot of moving parts and 2)completely subjective. It isn't really a fact at all. If you'd like to demonstrate the factual basis of this "bending over," you are free to do so. If you just want to assert that opinion as fact, I'm going to challenge it. Continued assertions that it's common knowledge are not helpful.

Quote:
Well, you haven't been held to any special standard and respect needs to be earned.
You, in this thread, have cited the likes of Business Insider and Politico (I'll respond to that post presently). Those are glorified, biased blogs, not neutral sources. Yet you took me to task in the other thread for citing biased sources . . . so yeah.

As far as respect . . . I've often heard it said that "respect needs to be earned," which always comes off as some kind of tough-guy thing to me. I believe you start by respecting others and when they do things to lose that respect, hey, at least you did the right thing. But whatever . . . that's my philosophy. I don't come into arguments with an agenda and guns blazing. I want good arguments and I want to be challenged. What I don't like is the snide little stuff that happens and the overt hostility that has already sent one member on a little vacation.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 09:06 AM   #130
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 48,099
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Counter examples: (note, I am a Libertarian, so I don't give a **** about which party)
  • Cook County democrats
  • Boss Tweed machine
  • Pro-slavery Democrats pre-civil war
  • Know-Nothing Party
Well the others where not national making up 40% of the electorate for one, and the blatant open disregard to all rule of law nationally is pretty new.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 09:28 AM   #131
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
Once again, you're accepting disputed or unverified accounts as factual.

Here's a couple of links you can use to educate yourself:

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...clinton-228304

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...n-obama-228388
Those two links say exactly what I said. 1)Clinton's staffers circulated this and considered using it and 2)Sid Blumenthal told 3 reporters from various outlets Now, you can pretend that Sid Blumenthal didn't tell three reporters to investigate Obama's Kenyan birth and that they didn't subsequently investigate that. Sid denied it, and we all know he's a Democrat and thus completely devoid of malintent. It's those journalists who have an agenda . . . or something.

Quote:
There's a galaxy of difference between maybe a couple of random people who happen to be Democrats flirting with the idea behind the scenes, and a Republican presidential candidate making public proclamations.

Now that we officially have that concession, all that's left for you to do is stop pretending that Trump and the GOP are somehow unconnected.
Once again, I stipulated from the outset that Trump is bad. What I would like to see good arguments about is how Trump's badness extends to the GOP as a whole ETA: AND that any such badness is unique to the GOP. Birtherism is not a good example of that as we have hashed out here. What else?
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 3rd October 2019 at 09:36 AM.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 11:05 AM   #132
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Biased source. I'm sure you can do better than that.
Now come on. A center-left or center-right bias isn't an egregious thing. Are they fast and loose with the facts?

Oh, wait. Your own source says they have a high factual reporting score.

I'm sure you can do better than that.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 12:07 PM   #133
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Resolved: Trump Era Republicans Are Uniquely Bad in American Political History

Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Now come on. A center-left or center-right bias isn't an egregious thing. Are they fast and loose with the facts?



Oh, wait. Your own source says they have a high factual reporting score.



I'm sure you can do better than that.


I see...I get derided for using biased sources and told I need neutral sources but a story with this headline:
Quote:
Republicans come out swinging in defense of Trump after House Democrats launch impeachment inquiry
that uses loaded words (as my source says they are wont to do) like “come out swinging,” isn’t a problem? They quoted three Republicans as defending Trump but also noted that Mitt Romney rebuked Trump and the Senate republicans joined with the Democrats and unanimously voted for Trump to release the whistleblower complaint. That hardly sounds like “coming out swinging” or “doing his bidding.”

I’ll also note that I followed-up with “I kid!” and pointed out the exact problem I had with the story.

My sources from the other NC thread got the basic facts right and that’s what I focused on there. But nope, no good apparently, because those are “biased” sources to begin with and thus, dismissible on their face.

It’s a double standard.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 3rd October 2019 at 12:08 PM.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 12:11 PM   #134
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,002
Originally Posted by Frank Newgent View Post
This week he kneads a dill dough.
Oh yay, a sex joke.

Anyway, my bad. I meant that Trump is like a master baker in the sense that both of them are people.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 12:16 PM   #135
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I see...I get derided for using biased sources and told I need neutral sources but a story with this headline:
Hey, don't blame me for what other people tell you. I'm just saying that your own source gives that site a high factual rating.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 12:28 PM   #136
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Hey, don't blame me for what other people tell you. I'm just saying that your own source gives that site a high factual rating.

...but mentions that they tend to use loaded words with a left-leaning tilt. As I pointed out.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2019, 05:35 PM   #137
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
 
Frank Newgent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,598
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Oh yay, a sex joke.

Anyway, my bad. I meant that Trump is like a master baker in the sense that both of them are people.
There are those that think I am a very stable genius, OK?
__________________
Disturbances of the semantic reactions in connection with faulty education and ignorance must be considered as sub-microscopic colloidal lesions - Alfred O. Korzybski
Frank Newgent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2019, 06:55 AM   #138
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
...but mentions that they tend to use loaded words with a left-leaning tilt. As I pointed out.
You implied that they were not trustworthy and asked the other poster to do better. I am pointing out that that was wrong. They are left-leaning but reliable, according to your own source.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2019, 07:03 AM   #139
Cainkane1
Philosopher
 
Cainkane1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The great American southeast
Posts: 8,776
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
I've presented this challenge in a couple of other threads; no one chose to take me up on it. I claim what the title says. For starters, I've never seen an American political party that so brazenly lies about such easily checked facts (and without a hint of evidence to support their position) regarding such matters as: Birtherism, Clinton Murder Spree, Climate Change, and Millions of Illegal Voters, to name but a few.

If you disagree, I challenge you to find me a comparable example of such blatant disregard for the Truth.
If what you say is true the Democrats are at least as bad if not worse. Looking into the characters of the Clintons or the lack thereof BIlly Clinton raped a woman in London when he was a college student. He has been photographed with a 14-year-old girl supposedly on a trip on the good ship Lolita going to an Island where men had sex with underage girls.

Trump may be crass but at least he unlike Bernie Sanders fights socialism whereas Bernie embraces it. Both sides lie without a doubt it's just that the Republicans do a better job of running America. Most of what you said was lies seem to be exaggerations rather than complete fabrications.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.
Cainkane1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2019, 07:13 AM   #140
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by Cainkane1 View Post
If what you say is true the Democrats are at least as bad if not worse.
Two wrongs make a right-wing!

Quote:
Looking into the characters of the Clintons or the lack thereof BIlly Clinton raped a woman in London when he was a college student.
You lot've been saying that for years without supporting it.

Quote:
Trump may be crass but at least he unlike Bernie Sanders fights socialism whereas Bernie embraces it.
Yeah fighting the evils of spending money on public projects is the most important thing here. We'll tolerate racism, murder, fraud and treason if it brings us closer to that goal.

Go Republicans!
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2019, 07:22 AM   #141
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You implied that they were not trustworthy and asked the other poster to do better. I am pointing out that that was wrong. They are left-leaning but reliable, according to your own source.

One must be a great writer in order to convey nuance in the written word. I am obviously not such a writer. But I try.

Yes I did imply that. I implied that in order to subsequently point out that dismissing a source for bias isn’t appropriate; the content is what should get the scrutiny. This was indicated by, “I kid!” and then pointing out exactly where I thought the specific article went wrong.

“Do better,” was intended as mockery of the kinds of things I get told when citing sources that have some bias.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th October 2019, 07:24 AM   #142
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Yes I did imply that. I implied that in order to subsequently point out that dismissing a source for bias isn’t appropriate; the content is what should get the scrutiny. This was indicated by, “I kid!” and then pointing out exactly where I thought the specific article went wrong.

“Do better,” was intended as mockery of the kinds of things I get told when citing sources that have some bias.
If you want to be entirely fair you have to distinguish bias from bias. There's a difference between the bias of The Grauniad and the one of Breitbart, to name two off the top of my head. Bias alone isn't the issue, but it's often a shorthand for media outlets who are blinded by that bias, or who play fast and loose with the facts. Perhaps that's the part you didn't quite understand.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2019, 03:54 AM   #143
Cabbage
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Yeah...sarcasm...that’s the ticket!

Anywho...Christians argue that the existence of God is “common knowledge.” Is that good enough for everyone to accept such a claim? No...no it isn’t. Is “common knowledge” the basis of a sound argument? No...no it isn’t.
....except for when it truly is common knowledge. Look, here's a link demonstrating that a majority of Republicans doubt that Obama was born in the US:

Quote:
The poll found that 72 percent of registered Republican voters hold doubts about the president's citizenship.

https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...l-doubt-obamas

Now, you've been pestering me for cites for weeks now. This is one I found in literally under five seconds. It truly is "common knowledge", and the extent to which you've pestered for a cite for this common knowledge causes me to question whether you are truly approaching this debate (and others) in good faith.

Quote:
You can do the ipse dixit shuffle all you like but I ain’t dancing with you.
It was never a shuffle, as I just demonstrated. I merely question your true intentions.

Quote:
What in tarnation is the difference between “uniquely bad” in history and “worse” than any other party in history? There is none. That’s just you trying to obfuscate to wiggle your way out of your ridiculous OP.
Do you not know the definition of "unique"? It means "one of a kind". It is not a superlative. Multiple things can be properly called "uniquely bad" without any of them being "worst". Here, let me give you an analogy: Las Vegas and Disney World are both "uniquely good" tourism destinations: They are both unique in what they have to offer. That does not imply either is "best". Do you see now? One thing I am claiming makes the current GOP bad is their unique gullibility to believe in things such as Birtherism.


Quote:
More obfuscation. You said: "I've never seen an American political party that so brazenly lies about such easily checked facts"


That quite clearly says it’s the whole party. If you don’t like those words in your mouth, you shouldn’t have put them in there in the first place.
It does not "quite clearly say" it's the whole party. It says what it says. I'm talking about party trends. These are my words, my statements. You don't get to tell me what my words mean--That's just a lame attempt to twist my words into something I never said.


Quote:
That’s one dude, not the whole party. You need to show that the whole party bought into birtherism. And you need find a way to prove this was a uniquely Republican thing. Speaking of common knowledge, it’s well-known that some Democrats bought into this crap too.Oh, I’m paying attention, just not your particular brand of selective attention.More aspersions I see.
That "one dude" happens to be the President. And I just did show a majority of the party bought into birtherism. It is uniquely Republican: You can probably find a few Birtherism Democrats, but they are a small minority.



Quote:
See what I mean, that’s all you’ve got: assertions, diversions and aspersions...all three in that one little paragraph.



Your claim is dubious and unfounded. Your whole rant is unclear and ever changing.
No, you merely protest over cites because you have no other defense.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Woah, woah...I thought that link was sarcasm?!

...........(sigh).............


The delivery was sarcasm. The links were sincere--And, as expected, were totally ignored by you.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2019, 10:02 AM   #144
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
....except for when it truly is common knowledge. Look, here's a link demonstrating that a majority of Republicans doubt that Obama was born in the US:




https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...l-doubt-obamas
All you've done is demonstrate that in 2016, too many people who are registered Republicans or are Republican leaning (as defined by the pollsters) believe that Obama was not born in the US. That is a far different thing from your original claim that the GOP -the party- espoused birtherism. I have already demonstrated how this is not a uniquely Republican claim or belief; indeed, your own poll proves that point, showing that 20-something % of Democrats still believe that tripe. Political propaganda is very effective and it comes from both sides and there is nothing unique about it to either the GOP or in US political history.

Quote:
Now, you've been pestering me for cites for weeks now. This is one I found in literally under five seconds. It truly is "common knowledge", and the extent to which you've pestered for a cite for this common knowledge causes me to question whether you are truly approaching this debate (and others) in good faith.
That cite was an own goal. It proves that birtherism is not unique to Republicans.

Quote:
It was never a shuffle, as I just demonstrated. I merely question your true intentions.
You should not be making arguments about me ("your true intentions") and focus on making good arguments about the subject at hand, which is not me.

Quote:
Do you not know the definition of "unique"? It means "one of a kind". It is not a superlative. Multiple things can be properly called "uniquely bad" without any of them being "worst". Here, let me give you an analogy: Las Vegas and Disney World are both "uniquely good" tourism destinations: They are both unique in what they have to offer. That does not imply either is "best". Do you see now? One thing I am claiming makes the current GOP bad is their unique gullibility to believe in things such as Birtherism.
OK, thanks for the clarification. You don't think they are the worst in history, you think that something makes them bad in a way that no other party has been bad. Birtherism is right out because you yourself demonstrated that such a belief is not uniquely Republican. What else you got that demonstrates something unique that only the Republicans espouse?

Quote:
It does not "quite clearly say" it's the whole party. It says what it says. I'm talking about party trends. These are my words, my statements. You don't get to tell me what my words mean--That's just a lame attempt to twist my words into something I never said.
If you were talking about trends you should have used the word, "trends." You said: "I've never seen an American political party that so brazenly lies about such easily checked facts." If that's not what you meant then you should have used different words. You don't get to set idiosyncratic definitions of words and then expect us to read your mind.

Quote:
That "one dude" happens to be the President. And I just did show a majority of the party bought into birtherism. It is uniquely Republican: You can probably find a few Birtherism Democrats, but they are a small minority.
If there are a few Dems that believe it, then it isn't unique to the GOP, now is it? In any case, the Birtherism debacle was an episode that demonstrated the effectiveness of political propaganda in the information age. Political propaganda has always been effective and there is nothing unique about it.

Quote:
No, you merely protest over cites because you have no other defense.
I have been assured on this forum that unbiased cites are very important when making a case. Do you not think so?




Quote:
...........(sigh).............


The delivery was sarcasm. The links were sincere--And, as expected, were totally ignored by you.
Then I stand by my initial critique: That "cite" was a really pathetic attempt to support your arguments.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 16th October 2019 at 10:03 AM.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2019, 11:27 AM   #145
Cabbage
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
All you've done is demonstrate that in 2016, too many people who are registered Republicans or are Republican leaning (as defined by the pollsters) believe that Obama was not born in the US. That is a far different thing from your original claim that the GOP -the party- espoused birtherism. I have already demonstrated how this is not a uniquely Republican claim or belief; indeed, your own poll proves that point, showing that 20-something % of Democrats still believe that tripe. Political propaganda is very effective and it comes from both sides and there is nothing unique about it to either the GOP or in US political history.
No. My claim has always been that the modern GOP is uniquely bad because of the level of gullibility. Given any large group you can find traces of most any stupidity: It takes gullibility on the level of the GOP to believe one BS conspiracy theory after another. I challenge you to find another major political party with majorities so duped by conspiracy theories such as Birtherism, Climate Change Denial, Clinton Murder Spree, and Illegals Voting. As I previously noted, I am in sole charge of declaring what my words mean, despite your repeated attempts to spin them.

Quote:
That cite was an own goal. It proves that birtherism is not unique to Republicans.
No. It proves that a majority of the GOP are gullible fools. I never claimed that no Democrats believe BS, merely that it's not the trend that we see in the GOP.

Quote:
You should not be making arguments about me ("your true intentions") and focus on making good arguments about the subject at hand, which is not me.
No. Not when you persist in demanding cites for what is already plain to see: Massive gullibility in the GOP. It smells like obfuscation and I'm not afraid to point that out.

Quote:
OK, thanks for the clarification. You don't think they are the worst in history, you think that something makes them bad in a way that no other party has been bad. Birtherism is right out because you yourself demonstrated that such a belief is not uniquely Republican. What else you got that demonstrates something unique that only the Republicans espouse?
There you go, desperately trying to twist my meaning and my intentions again. Birtherism is most certainly not right out: Find me another major party that has a majority belief in Birtherism--Only then will I acknowledge that the gullibility of the GOP is not unique. What else have a I got? Well, to add to the already demonstrated Birtherism: I've repeatedly mentioned: Climate Change Denial, Clinton Murder Spree, and Illegals Voting. Find me another party that is gullible enough to have a majority believing in that BS. You can't-------Proving my point yet again! LOL!

Quote:
If you were talking about trends you should have used the word, "trends." You said: "I've never seen an American political party that so brazenly lies about such easily checked facts." If that's not what you meant then you should have used different words. You don't get to set idiosyncratic definitions of words and then expect us to read your mind.
To anyone debating in good faith (unlike you, evidently) it would have been obvious I was referring to party leadership and trends. Of course I can't make any universal statement about Every. Single. G. O. P. Member. and your insistence that my words be interpreted that way smacks of desperation on your part.

I never said "everyone", so why did you assume I meant everyone? Oh yeah, because it's the only defense you could come up with out of desperation.

Quote:
If there are a few Dems that believe it, then it isn't unique to the GOP, now is it?
You keep repeating that. It's as false now as the first time: The GOP is unique with a majority of gullible idiots that believe it. QED.


Quote:
In any case, the Birtherism debacle was an episode that demonstrated the effectiveness of political propaganda in the information age. Political propaganda has always been effective and there is nothing unique about it.

I have been assured on this forum that unbiased cites are very important when making a case. Do you not think so?
They're not necessary to cite the obvious, such as Republicans tend to believe BS, or that Neil Armstrong was the first man on the moon. You ask for cites merely as deflection, not to facilitate actual debate.




Quote:
Then I stand by my initial critique: That "cite" was a really pathetic attempt to support your arguments.
Excuses, Excuses. I stand by my original claim: You're looking for any reason whatsoever to avoid engaging on the topic of unique gullibility/stupidity in the constituency of the GOP.

Otherwise, you might have (gosh!) actually read one of those cites. Weeks ago.

Imagine that! LOL!

Last edited by Agatha; 16th October 2019 at 12:52 PM. Reason: Removed extraneous quote tag
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2019, 01:34 PM   #146
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
No. My claim has always been that the modern GOP is uniquely bad because of the level of gullibility. Given any large group you can find traces of most any stupidity: It takes gullibility on the level of the GOP to believe one BS conspiracy theory after another. I challenge you to find another major political party with majorities so duped by conspiracy theories such as Birtherism, Climate Change Denial, Clinton Murder Spree, and Illegals Voting. As I previously noted, I am in sole charge of declaring what my words mean, despite your repeated attempts to spin them.
Don't blame your poor choice of words on me.
Quote:
No. It proves that a majority of the GOP are gullible fools. I never claimed that no Democrats believe BS, merely that it's not the trend that we see in the GOP.
This "trend" angle is not what your OP said. This is a new angle that you've taken and it's moving the goalposts. Your original OP is nothing but a rant.
Quote:
No. Not when you persist in demanding cites for what is already plain to see: Massive gullibility in the GOP. It smells like obfuscation and I'm not afraid to point that out.
You might as well argue, "I don't have to cite evidence for God because it's plain to see!"

You made a really bad argument in your OP. You said "Trump Era Republicans are uniquely bad in American Political History." That is a ridiculous claim. What makes it a bad argument and a ridiculous claim isn't so much the content (you are entitled to your opinion) but the way that you state it as a demonstrable fact rather than your own opinion.

So now you've "clarified" your claim (aka, moved the goalposts) to this idea that you are really talking about "trends" in the GOP. So what exactly, in precise terms, is your claim? That the modern GOP is uniquely bad because the party leadership and the party as a whole trends towards believing BS?

Quote:
There you go, desperately trying to twist my meaning and my intentions again.
Don't blame me for your lack of clarity and goalpost moving.
Quote:
Birtherism is most certainly not right out: Find me another major party that has a majority belief in Birtherism--Only then will I acknowledge that the gullibility of the GOP is not unique.
See, here's another goalpost move. Now your claim is, "The GOP is uniquely bad because a majority of them believe in Birtherism." That is some weak sauce, my friend. And you say that in order to refute your argument, I have to show that another party also has a majority belief in Birtherism? Two observations:

1)The arguement is extremely weak -even if you are correct, who cares? What does it even mean to be "uniquely bad?" They are bad in a different way than any other . . . but is that way better or worse than others? Implicit in your original argument was the idea that you think that makes them worse than any other party in history. But you've since clarified that you didn't mean to imply that, just that they are different. If that is all you are saying, then it's such weak sauce that it isn't worthy of any further examination.

2)The argument is so specific to very recent history as to render your OP meaningless. You said "in American Political History." Birtherism is indeed a unique episode in American Political History, but it isn't particular egregious in the history of American politics. I mean, we are talking about a history that includes one of the great injustices of all time: slavery. It includes the Jim Crow era. It includes the internment of Japanese-Americans in concentration camps. It includes the overt political intertwining of the KKK and major political parties. When we look at all of American Political History, birtherism is little more than an embarrassing footnote.


Quote:
What else have a I got? Well, to add to the already demonstrated Birtherism:
The only thing demonstrated is that Birtherism was not unique to the GOP.
Quote:
I've repeatedly mentioned: Climate Change Denial, Clinton Murder Spree, and Illegals Voting. Find me another party that is gullible enough to have a majority believing in that BS. You can't-------Proving my point yet again! LOL!
If your only point is that the GOP is unique because those beliefs are shared by a majority of their members . . . well, again, so what? There's nothing further worth exploring there because it's just, like, your opinion, man.

The Democrats are uniquely bad in their denial of the science concerning the utility of nuclear power in the fight against climate change. The Democrats are uniquely bad in their embrace of bad medicine concerning supposed mental illnesses Trump has. The Democrats are uniquely bad in their support for socialism while denying that they support socialism. I could go on and on with other such meaningless and bad "arguments" about the "unique badness" of the Democrats but they would be exactly what your arguments here are -opinionated rants with little substance.

Quote:
To anyone debating in good faith (unlike you, evidently) it would have been obvious I was referring to party leadership and trends. Of course I can't make any universal statement about Every. Single. G. O. P. Member. and your insistence that my words be interpreted that way smacks of desperation on your part.
Your OP is clearly worded. You chose the wrong words. Now that you've moved the goalposts, your argument ends up being nothing more than an opinionated rant.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by xjx388; 16th October 2019 at 01:36 PM.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2019, 02:22 PM   #147
Cabbage
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Don't blame your poor choice of words on me.
This "trend" angle is not what your OP said. This is a new angle that you've taken and it's moving the goalposts. Your original OP is nothing but a rant.
You might as well argue, "I don't have to cite evidence for God because it's plain to see!"
Since evidence for God is not plain to see, that would be completely different than noting, for example, the president of the United States is a well known Birtherist. You're being disingenuous.

Quote:
You made a really bad argument in your OP. You said "Trump Era Republicans are uniquely bad in American Political History." That is a ridiculous claim. What makes it a bad argument and a ridiculous claim isn't so much the content (you are entitled to your opinion) but the way that you state it as a demonstrable fact rather than your own opinion.

So now you've "clarified" your claim (aka, moved the goalposts) to this idea that you are really talking about "trends" in the GOP. So what exactly, in precise terms, is your claim? That the modern GOP is uniquely bad because the party leadership and the party as a whole trends towards believing BS?

Don't blame me for your lack of clarity and goalpost moving.See, here's another goalpost move. Now your claim is, "The GOP is uniquely bad because a majority of them believe in Birtherism." That is some weak sauce, my friend. And you say that in order to refute your argument, I have to show that another party also has a majority belief in Birtherism?
No, you have to show another party is so susceptible to BS in any form. And it's not just Birtherism: The modern GOP is full of BS beliefs.

Quote:
Two observations:

1)The arguement is extremely weak -even if you are correct, who cares? What does it even mean to be "uniquely bad?" They are bad in a different way than any other . . . but is that way better or worse than others? Implicit in your original argument was the idea that you think that makes them worse than any other party in history. But you've since clarified that you didn't mean to imply that, just that they are different. If that is all you are saying, then it's such weak sauce that it isn't worthy of any further examination.
I happen to think a constituency full of such ignorance is not just something merely to be ashamed of but actually dangerous. They are liable to do something stupid, like try and elect a nutjob as president. That's dangerous.

And you again twist my words around, saying "Implicit in your original argument was the idea that you think that makes them worse than any other party in history". That wasn't implicit in my argument, it was implicit in your misunderstanding.

Quote:
2)The argument is so specific to very recent history as to render your OP meaningless. You said "in American Political History." Birtherism is indeed a unique episode in American Political History, but it isn't particular egregious in the history of American politics. I mean, we are talking about a history that includes one of the great injustices of all time: slavery. It includes the Jim Crow era. It includes the internment of Japanese-Americans in concentration camps. It includes the overt political intertwining of the KKK and major political parties. When we look at all of American Political History, birtherism is little more than an embarrassing footnote.
It's not specific to very recent history. Birtherism is merely an example of the more general gullibility that concerns me.


Quote:
The only thing demonstrated is that Birtherism was not unique to the GOP.If your only point is that the GOP is unique because those beliefs are shared by a majority of their members . . . well, again, so what? There's nothing further worth exploring there because it's just, like, your opinion, man.
It's the fact that those beliefs are so common among the GOP that concerns me (and should concern you) that such a large voting bloc is affecting change based on pure superstition and ignorance.

Quote:
The Democrats are uniquely bad in their denial of the science concerning the utility of nuclear power in the fight against climate change. The Democrats are uniquely bad in their embrace of bad medicine concerning supposed mental illnesses Trump has. The Democrats are uniquely bad in their support for socialism while denying that they support socialism. I could go on and on with other such meaningless and bad "arguments" about the "unique badness" of the Democrats but they would be exactly what your arguments here are -opinionated rants with little substance.
Now you're just spewing more BS. There are actual arguments to be had regarding nuclear power vs other power and the environment. Concern over Trump's mental health should be a concern. And you know damn well there's a lot of distortion over USSR Socialism versus, for example, Scandanavian Socialism. None of that is comparable to the BS that is Birtherism. Or the Clinton Murder Conspiracy (you keep focusing on Birtherism while my words make it quite plain that is merely one example of the alarming gullibility I'm really talking about. Just another reason why it's hard for me to imagine you are engaging in good faith).

Quote:
Your OP is clearly worded.
Thanks! And you are being needlessly and worthlessly pedantic in trying to pretend I was talking about every single member of the party instead of general trends. That should be obvious, really. Get Serious or please just get outta here.

Again, I invite you to prove me wrong: Find me a BS belief held by a majority of some other major party, now or in history. While you're at it, find several, because that's the level of gullibility the GOP is currently at.

In an effort to get you to forget Birtherism specifically and actually engage on the actual point of more general gullibility, here's another cite for GOP gullibility:

85% of Republicans Reject That Climate Change Is a Serious Problem That Requires Action

https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...cans-nbc-news/
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2019, 02:48 PM   #148
Senex
Philosopher
 
Senex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: School for Rumpology, CT
Posts: 5,840
Anyone still defending Trump I have no respect for. Anyone who ever defended Trump but has seen the light is unlikely to regain my respect. Trump was clearly immoral and not up for the job from day one. He's done worse than this Ukraine stuff but it was lucky we had a courageous whistle blower who called him out on this one of many nefarious activities I'll take it.
Senex is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 09:37 AM   #149
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Since evidence for God is not plain to see, that would be completely different than noting, for example, the president of the United States is a well known Birtherist. You're being disingenuous.
Nope.

You originally said "Not when you persist in demanding cites for what is already plain to see: Massive gullibility in the GOP." You have now changed it to "the President of the United States is a well known Birtherist." Again, you are moving the goalposts to something else when challenged.

I don't think "massive gullibility in the GOP," is "plain to see." You may believe this, but it isn't demonstrated. Gullibility would imply that people in the GOP are dumb and will believe anything and I don't think that's the case at all; I think there are other factors at work besides gullibility. But I'll leave it to you to better make your own convincing factual case, if you can/want; however, "it's plain to see," simply won't cut it.

Quote:
No, you have to show another party is so susceptible to BS in any form. And it's not just Birtherism: The modern GOP is full of BS beliefs.
Before I do that, I'd like to get a handle on what exactly you are claiming. Your claim, in its current iteration, seems to be that because a majority of people in polls say they believe in BS like birtherism, this means that the modern GOP is uniquely bad. Would you say that's a fair summary?

Quote:
I happen to think a constituency full of such ignorance is not just something merely to be ashamed of but actually dangerous. They are liable to do something stupid, like try and elect a nutjob as president. That's dangerous.
That's nice. I don't agree with you but I am not here to argue about your misguided opinions. I'd like to focus on what you said in your OP.

Quote:
And you again twist my words around, saying "Implicit in your original argument was the idea that you think that makes them worse than any other party in history". That wasn't implicit in my argument, it was implicit in your misunderstanding.
If I misunderstood, it was because of the way you chose to frame your argument. Why say, "the GOP is uniquely bad in American Political History," if you didn't mean to compare them unfavorably against their historical equivalents? That creates an implication. Now, maybe you didn't mean to create such an implication. But even if you didn't, "uniquely bad," as you have clarified it to mean, "bad in a way that is different from before," is not a very interesting argument. Every historical "badness" antecedent is "unique" because of the time and circumstances such "badness" arose from. If you aren't saying that the GOP is worse, then you aren't really saying anything interesting at all.
Quote:
It's not specific to very recent history. Birtherism is merely an example of the more general gullibility that concerns me.
What concerns me is the policies and legislation that a particular party actually acts on. There were not many leaders (if any) of the GOP who espoused that conspiracy. That polls of the general public reflect widespread acceptance of conspiracies doesn't really concern me at all. " People are stupid" has been a long standing philosophy of mine. And this widespread reporting of belief in conspiracy theories which you say demonstrates gullibility crosses party lines, so you can't really say that belief in conspiracy theories is unique to the modern GOP. Have you forgotten, so soon, the "Bush did 9/11" conspiracies that were/are widely believed by respondents on the left?

But any way, if "gullibility" as demonstrated by belief in conspiracy theories is so important to you, I don't see how you can dismiss the fact that a significant amount of Democrats also believe in Birtherism and their own weird little conspiracies.

In fact, it's the very fact that Americans in general believe in conspiracy theories so much that tells me that I don't really have to worry too much about it. No major party has made a conspiracy theory the cornerstone of their platform and so I don't get too worked up about such trivial nonsense.
Quote:
It's the fact that those beliefs are so common among the GOP that concerns me (and should concern you) that such a large voting bloc is affecting change based on pure superstition and ignorance.
It does concern me. I am concerned with the hold the Christian Right has on the GOP. I am concerned with alot of things about the modern GOP.

So why isn't it enough that I acknowledge the GOP has issues? Why must they be unique in their badness? What does that even mean? Do you think it means that I should reject conservatism and embrace the progressive Democratic Party?

Quote:
Now you're just spewing more BS.
Uh, yeah! That was the whole point.
Quote:
There are actual arguments to be had regarding nuclear power vs other power and the environment. Concern over Trump's mental health should be a concern.
No. Concern over Trump's actions should be a concern.
Quote:
And you know damn well there's a lot of distortion over USSR Socialism versus, for example, Scandanavian Socialism. None of that is comparable to the BS that is Birtherism.
You are right: Democratic Socialism is much more worthy as a cause for concern than some old stupidity about Obama's birthplace. Free college and healthcare! Raise taxes! That is pretty alarming from my POV.
Quote:
Or the Clinton Murder Conspiracy (you keep focusing on Birtherism while my words make it quite plain that is merely one example of the alarming gullibility I'm really talking about. Just another reason why it's hard for me to imagine you are engaging in good faith).
The Clinton Murder conspiracy . . . you really wanna make the argument that it's a wide spread GOP belief? This is fringe at best.

Quote:
Thanks! <snip>
Don't thank me until you actually read the rest of that paragraph.

Quote:
Again, I invite you to prove me wrong: Find me a BS belief held by a majority of some other major party, now or in history. While you're at it, find several, because that's the level of gullibility the GOP is currently at.
Anti-vax, Pharma companies want to keep us sick, Corporations control the government, Bush did 9/11, Jews are conspiring, Communists are infiltrating, Japanese-Americans are a danger, etc etc ad nauseum. Conspiracy thought is a uniquely American thing.

Quote:
In an effort to get you to forget Birtherism specifically and actually engage on the actual point of more general gullibility, here's another cite for GOP gullibility:

85% of Republicans Reject That Climate Change Is a Serious Problem That Requires Action

https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...cans-nbc-news/
First of all, let's not pretend that Esquire's spin on the actual poll is substantive. The actual poll, as Esquire handwaves away, actually shows that a majority of Americans is beginning to accept the reality of climate change. That's a good thing in my book.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 11:32 AM   #150
Cabbage
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Nope.

You originally said "Not when you persist in demanding cites for what is already plain to see: Massive gullibility in the GOP." You have now changed it to "the President of the United States is a well known Birtherist." Again, you are moving the goalposts to something else when challenged.
No, I am pointing out that no cite is required because both statements: 1) Trump is a birther, and 2) Birthers are common in the GOP, are obvious. You really shouldn't need a cite for those facts--If you were paying attention you'd already know.

Quote:
I don't think "massive gullibility in the GOP," is "plain to see." You may believe this, but it isn't demonstrated. Gullibility would imply that people in the GOP are dumb and will believe anything and I don't think that's the case at all; I think there are other factors at work besides gullibility. But I'll leave it to you to better make your own convincing factual case, if you can/want; however, "it's plain to see," simply won't cut it.
They believe in BS, lots of BS. You're merely quibbling about whether that's due to gullibility or due to right wing smear campaigns. Both reflect negatively on the GOP and both result in a major political party being swayed by superstitious BS.

And it's "plain to see" because I provided the polls you asked for.

Quote:
Before I do that, I'd like to get a handle on what exactly you are claiming. Your claim, in its current iteration, seems to be that because a majority of people in polls say they believe in BS like birtherism, this means that the modern GOP is uniquely bad. Would you say that's a fair summary?
We can begin there, anyway. It doesn't address the previously mentioned disinformation campaigns being waged by the GOP through social media (in addition to the regular channels) but I'm curious to see you fail out of the gate in trying to debunk even the first part.

Quote:
That's nice. I don't agree with you but I am not here to argue about your misguided opinions. I'd like to focus on what you said in your OP.
You don't think electing a nutjob to the presidency is dangerous? You are wrong.

Quote:
If I misunderstood, it was because of the way you chose to frame your argument. Why say, "the GOP is uniquely bad in American Political History," if you didn't mean to compare them unfavorably against their historical equivalents?
Because my use of the word "unique" means "unmatched" or "unprecedented". I'm not making a value judgment over whether A or B is worse, only that they are both unique.

Quote:
That creates an implication. Now, maybe you didn't mean to create such an implication. But even if you didn't, "uniquely bad," as you have clarified it to mean, "bad in a way that is different from before," is not a very interesting argument.
Considering that we live in a unique age saturated and influenced by disinformation campaigns being waged for the first time on social media, I happen to think it's not merely interesting but actually fascinating.

Quote:
Every historical "badness" antecedent is "unique" because of the time and circumstances such "badness" arose from.
Well, OK then! I guess we agree after all! LOL! Look, the reason I made this post is because certain Trump sycophants on this board kept insisting that if Trump isn't uniquely bad we have no reason to complain. Which is absolute rubbish for at least two reasons:

1) Even if things were absolutely identical in American history 20, 30, or 130 years before, we still have the right to complain about things that are still wrong, and

2) Nothing in history is ever duplicated precisely. Even if we were going through a pro/anti slavery Civil War fight now in the early 21st century it would be completely different (unique!) from the 1860s: Different weapons. Different media. Different communications.

I continue to claim that even if the Republican/Trump malfeasance currently infecting America was merely the 15th iteration of the same in the course of history, this time is unique for the same reason all the other times were unique. It's unique now, specifically because of the social media vector that propaganda and misinformation campaigns are now using to spread BS unlike ever before.

My ultimate point is: STFU already with the claim there is nothing to be alarmed about until things are uniquely bad. Do you disagree?


Quote:
If you aren't saying that the GOP is worse, then you aren't really saying anything interesting at all.
Maybe not. But then again, I thought "You can't complain until it's uniquely bad" is a terrible argument that should be focused on--If only to embarrass those ignorant enough to propose it.

Quote:
What concerns me is the policies and legislation that a particular party actually acts on. There were not many leaders (if any) of the GOP who espoused that conspiracy.
If any? Seriously? Disingenuous much? You just named one earlier: Trump. Early onset Alzheimer's? Is that your problem?

Quote:
That polls of the general public reflect widespread acceptance of conspiracies doesn't really concern me at all.
It should. These people vote, after all.

Quote:
" People are stupid" has been a long standing philosophy of mine.
Oh, but for decades now the GOP has been harnessing the votes of the stupid into a powerful voting bloc. They call it the "Southern Strategy".

Quote:
And this widespread reporting of belief in conspiracy theories which you say demonstrates gullibility crosses party lines, so you can't really say that belief in conspiracy theories is unique to the modern GOP.
No, it does not. Look, I'm sure you can find both R's and D' that believe Elvis is dead, we never landed on the moon, or that Mr Roger's was a Mafia kingpin. You keep pretending that numbers of any nonzero sort are significant. You keep ignoring that these morons form a majority of the GOP!!! You have no response to that so you keep whatabouting to "Well, some Democrats believed it, too!". Not a majority. No. Only in the GOP are the inmates running the asylum.

Quote:
Have you forgotten, so soon, the "Bush did 9/11" conspiracies that were/are widely believed by respondents on the left?
Was it a majority? Do you have a cite showing it was a majority?

Quote:
But any way, if "gullibility" as demonstrated by belief in conspiracy theories is so important to you, I don't see how you can dismiss the fact that a significant amount of Democrats also believe in Birtherism and their own weird little conspiracies.
A minority. Unlike the GOP, they are not representative of the party.

Quote:
In fact, it's the very fact that Americans in general believe in conspiracy theories so much that tells me that I don't really have to worry too much about it. No major party has made a conspiracy theory the cornerstone of their platform and so I don't get too worked up about such trivial nonsense.
Give the GOP a little more time. Trump will do his damnedest to make it happen.


Quote:
It does concern me. I am concerned with the hold the Christian Right has on the GOP. I am concerned with alot of things about the modern GOP.
Wait, can we rewind that?

Quote:
In fact, it's the very fact that Americans in general believe in conspiracy theories so much that tells me that I don't really have to worry too much about it. No major party has made a conspiracy theory the cornerstone of their platform and so I don't get too worked up about such trivial nonsense.
...
...
...
It does concern me. I am concerned with the hold the Christian Right has on the GOP. I am concerned with alot of things about the modern GOP.
Make up your mind whether it concerns you or not, then get back to me.

Quote:
So why isn't it enough that I acknowledge the GOP has issues? Why must they be unique in their badness? What does that even mean? Do you think it means that I should reject conservatism and embrace the progressive Democratic Party?
I'm not demanding you do anything. You keep responding and I keep defending my position. If you think you've said enough, we can stop right here. I don't hold you responsible for the faults of the GOP nor do I require you to continue defending them.

Quote:
Uh, yeah! That was the whole point.
You misunderstand (probably deliberately). You actually brought up points that should be brought up by Democrats: There's an argument to be had concerning every one of them. You then compared them to asinine BS like Birtherism. There's no comparison: That's the BS.

Quote:
No. Concern over Trump's actions should be a concern.You are right: Democratic Socialism is much more worthy as a cause for concern than some old stupidity about Obama's birthplace.
See? You're agreeing with me? Why in the hell did you bring them up as examples of Democrat BS??? They're not BS--They are legitimate issues...unlike Birtherism. You have yet to find that kind of BS mirrored in the Democrats.

Quote:
Free college and healthcare! Raise taxes! That is pretty alarming from my POV.
You find raising taxes alarming? Even when taxes are at historic lows? Looks to me like you've bought the GOP indoctrination in full.


Quote:
The Clinton Murder conspiracy . . . you really wanna make the argument that it's a wide spread GOP belief? This is fringe at best.
....Fringe that is currently endorsed by the President. LOL! You should probably give up on defending these elements as "fringe" while he is in office--It's just not working.

Quote:
Don't thank me until you actually read the rest of that paragraph.
I did read the rest of that paragraph. I saw more of the usual distortion of my words that I have come to expect from you.

Quote:
Anti-vax, Pharma companies want to keep us sick, Corporations control the government, Bush did 9/11, Jews are conspiring, Communists are infiltrating, Japanese-Americans are a danger, etc etc ad nauseum. Conspiracy thought is a uniquely American thing.
Give me a cite for any one of those that shows: 1) A majority of Democrats believe it, and 2) It's actually BS. For example, I'm not convinced that corporations don't control the government, de facto, not de jure. I don't think that one is BS, really.

Quote:
First of all, let's not pretend that Esquire's spin on the actual poll is substantive. The actual poll, as Esquire handwaves away, actually shows that a majority of Americans is beginning to accept the reality of climate change. That's a good thing in my book.
You deliberately miss the point: It's explicitly in the GOP where the stupidity resides.

Again.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 11:39 AM   #151
Jungle Jim
Graduate Poster
 
Jungle Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,124
NBC Poll - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/mee...debate-n950646

Jungle Jim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 11:49 AM   #152
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by Jungle Jim View Post
Only 71%? What's wrong with people?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 07:50 PM   #153
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
No, I am pointing out that no cite is required because both statements: 1) Trump is a birther, and 2) Birthers are common in the GOP, are obvious. You really shouldn't need a cite for those facts--If you were paying attention you'd already know.
I do, however, need a cite for what you actually argued: "Not when you persist in demanding cites for what is already plain to see: Massive gullibility in the GOP." You keep moving the goalposts . . .

Quote:
They believe in BS, lots of BS.
Everybody believes in BS. BS is not a uniquely Republican thing. You are merely quibbling about how "bad" the BS the GOP believes is and ignoring the BS anyone else believes.
Quote:
You're merely quibbling about whether that's due to gullibility or due to right wing smear campaigns. Both reflect negatively on the GOP and both result in a major political party being swayed by superstitious BS.
I have never said it wasn't bad or didn't reflect negatively. You are the one insisting that it's "uniquely bad in American Political History," which is a ludicrous statement that you are utterly failing to defend.

What you are doing is, basically, telling us the things that concern you about the GOP. That is a far different and, frankly, uninteresting subject.

Quote:
And it's "plain to see" because I provided the polls you asked for.
It's plain to see that people who call themselves Republicans or lean Republican bought into birtherism as late as 2016. Big deal . . . that is not evidence that the modern GOP is "uniquely bad," as you've defined it.
Quote:
We can begin there, anyway. It doesn't address the previously mentioned disinformation campaigns
You only mentioned "disinformation campaigns," in this post. More goalpost moving.
Quote:
being waged by the GOP through social media (in addition to the regular channels) but I'm curious to see you fail out of the gate in trying to debunk even the first part.
OK good. Now based on your other comments, I think it's also a fair reading of your arguments that when you say, "uniquely bad in American Political History," you don't mean they are the worst in American just that they are bad in a way that is different from any other.

Guess what? I don't care about that argument. You are free to make any such weird distinction in your mind about how unique the modern GOP is. I would even agree with that to some extent but only in the sense that this is a unique time in American History: never before has information been so easily disseminated through social media and other channels. However, I would not agree that belief in BS makes the modern GOP unique since conspiratorial thinking is such a big part of the larger American culture and has been since the Founding.

Quote:
You don't think electing a nutjob to the presidency is dangerous? You are wrong.
I don't think it's dangerous. I am right.
Quote:
Because my use of the word "unique" means "unmatched" or "unprecedented". I'm not making a value judgment over whether A or B is worse, only that they are both unique.
Now hold on. If you say "unprecedented badness" or "unmatched badness," you are clearly and explicitly making a value judgement that this particular badness is worse than any that came before it. This is why I say your OP was not a very well worded argument. It creates implications whether you meant it to or not.
Quote:
Considering that we live in a unique age saturated and influenced by disinformation campaigns being waged for the first time on social media, I happen to think it's not merely interesting but actually fascinating.
Oh sure, that aspect of it is worthy of study and argument. But the idea that the GOP is unique in the particular form of badness you say they currently embody is not particularly interesting, if you aren't actually saying they are worse than any other.
Quote:
Well, OK then! I guess we agree after all! LOL!
I agree that every time's and place's form of badness is unique. I do not agree that it's worthy of discussion, being a rather obvious statement.
Quote:
Look, the reason I made this post is because certain Trump sycophants on this board kept insisting that if Trump isn't uniquely bad we have no reason to complain.
OK, but when I used that phrase in another thread, I actually meant to use the form of "unique" which would imply that the badness is worse than any other, much like saying a person is, "uniquely qualified," would mean the person is better qualified than any other because of the person's special attributes/experience/etc. Therefore, I read your OP as saying that the modern GOP is worse than any other. If that's not what you meant, fair enough but I'm not interested in arguing about that.
Quote:
Which is absolute rubbish for at least two reasons:

1) Even if things were absolutely identical in American history 20, 30, or 130 years before, we still have the right to complain about things that are still wrong, and

2) Nothing in history is ever duplicated precisely. Even if we were going through a pro/anti slavery Civil War fight now in the early 21st century it would be completely different (unique!) from the 1860s: Different weapons. Different media. Different communications.
No one said you don't have a right to complain. You absolutely do. But the idea that there is something interesting in uniqueness all by itself is not an idea I share.

Quote:
I continue to claim that even if the Republican/Trump malfeasance currently infecting America was merely the 15th iteration of the same in the course of history, this time is unique for the same reason all the other times were unique. It's unique now, specifically because of the social media vector that propaganda and misinformation campaigns are now using to spread BS unlike ever before.
Like I said, the modern methods of communication and the study of their effect on politics might be an interesting discussion but the idea that the GOP is therefore "uniquely" bad is not.

Quote:
My ultimate point is: STFU already with the claim there is nothing to be alarmed about until things are uniquely bad. Do you disagree?
I disagree that anyone has actually made that argument or that such was under discussion here in this thread. If that's what you wanted to discuss you should have lead with that "ultimate point."

To hear many arguments on this forum, Trump and the GOP are existential threats to America to a level that people are actually frightened. Any little thing the GOP or Trump does is cited as evidence. I find those arguments to be hyperbolic. We are going to be fine. Which is not to say that I approve of or support what Trump and the GOP are doing, only that I don't find it to be some catastrophe in the making. America is much stronger than that.
Quote:
Maybe not. But then again, I thought "You can't complain until it's uniquely bad" is a terrible argument that should be focused on--If only to embarrass those ignorant enough to propose it.
That is an argument that has not been made on this forum.
Quote:
If any? Seriously? Disingenuous much? You just named one earlier: Trump. Early onset Alzheimer's? Is that your problem?
Wonderful, another personal attack. I had hoped we were past that . . .

Quote:
It should. These people vote, after all.

Oh, but for decades now the GOP has been harnessing the votes of the stupid into a powerful voting bloc. They call it the "Southern Strategy".
If I worried about the foolishness of voters, I wouldn't be able to sleep!
Quote:
No, it does not. Look, I'm sure you can find both R's and D' that believe Elvis is dead, we never landed on the moon, or that Mr Roger's was a Mafia kingpin. You keep pretending that numbers of any nonzero sort are significant. You keep ignoring that these morons form a majority of the GOP!!! You have no response to that so you keep whatabouting to "Well, some Democrats believed it, too!". Not a majority. No. Only in the GOP are the inmates running the asylum.



Was it a majority? Do you have a cite showing it was a majority?



A minority. Unlike the GOP, they are not representative of the party.
Why are you so focused on a majority? Don't you think that 20-something% of Democrats believing in birtherism is significant? Or 30% of Dems not believing Climate Change is a serious problem that needs action? America as a whole has a problem with BS, blaming and focusing on one party as the sole problem simply based on the fact that 50.001% of its members believe something is just weird.

Quote:
Make up your mind whether it concerns you or not, then get back to me.
You are conflating two different statements. The real problems with the GOP concern me and I'm not worried about the fact that polls reflect widespread belief in conspiracy problems. I'm not sure why you think that's a contradiction.

Quote:
I'm not demanding you do anything. You keep responding and I keep defending my position. If you think you've said enough, we can stop right here. I don't hold you responsible for the faults of the GOP nor do I require you to continue defending them.

You misunderstand (probably deliberately). You actually brought up points that should be brought up by Democrats: There's an argument to be had concerning every one of them. You then compared them to asinine BS like Birtherism. There's no comparison: That's the BS.
You misunderstand, but I won't cast aspersions on you.
Quote:
See? You're agreeing with me? Why in the hell did you bring them up as examples of Democrat BS??? They're not BS--They are legitimate issues...unlike Birtherism. You have yet to find that kind of BS mirrored in the Democrats.
I'm not agreeing with you.

1)The Democrats' embrace of the BS involved in remote psychiatric evaluations of Donald Trump is an example of "dumb things Democrats espouse." They shouldn't encourage that quackery; they should focus on the actual stuff Trump does. Calling him "Dangerously mentally ill," is nothing but an ad hom based on inappropriate and unethical application of medical science.

2)Democratic Socialism is a dumb thing the Democrats embrace that I am actually worried about because too many people in the party want free stuff but they don't have a workable plan to actually enact it. I contrast this with the Birtherism BS that really shouldn't be a cause for concern because 1)It's long over now and 2)Nothing came of it.

Quote:
You find raising taxes alarming? Even when taxes are at historic lows? Looks to me like you've bought the GOP indoctrination in full.
Here's another dumb thing Democrats believe: "Disagreement with Democratic Party policies is evidence of indoctrination."

Quote:
....Fringe that is currently endorsed by the President. LOL! You should probably give up on defending these elements as "fringe" while he is in office--It's just not working.
Trump espouses fringe beliefs. That he's the President doesn't make his weird beliefs mainstream.



Quote:
I did read the rest of that paragraph. I saw more of the usual distortion of my words that I have come to expect from you.
You accuse me, constantly, of dishonesty and distortion. This is well-poisoning. Many of your arguments in this thread have been pure sophistry.

I'm kinda tired of it, honestly. But I'll leave this here just to see what you think about it. . .

Quote:
But since the election, there has been a noticeable increase in the flow of dubious and unsupported claims among liberals...
Even some prominent liberals like Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton, seem open to conspiracy theories of the sort typically espoused by figures like Alex Jones and Glenn Beck. (After the recent violent demonstration at the University of California at Berkeley, Mr. Reich raised the possibility that the far right “was in cahoots” with the agitators, writing a blog post titled “A Yiannopoulos, Bannon, Trump Plot to Control American Universities?”)
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 07:52 PM   #154
Cainkane1
Philosopher
 
Cainkane1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The great American southeast
Posts: 8,776
As an avid "Trumper" I find your lack of enthusiasm for our current POTUS disheartening.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.
Cainkane1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 07:54 PM   #155
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,002
There are progressives even today who still believe in communism, and in political violence. It's astonishing that something as insignificant as birtherism even registers on the outrage scale.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 08:32 PM   #156
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,091
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There are progressives even today who still believe in communism, and in political violence. It's astonishing that something as insignificant as birtherism even registers on the outrage scale.
there is a difference between thoughts and actions.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 08:38 PM   #157
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,002
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
there is a difference between thoughts and actions.
Communist actions have caused a lot more harm than birther actions.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 08:46 PM   #158
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 10,091
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Communist actions have caused a lot more harm than birther actions.
In the US? In the last decade?`

Or do you assume that the US will instantly become like Stalinist Russia if progressives get into power?
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 08:51 PM   #159
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
there is a difference between thoughts and actions.
Indeed, there was a lot of bluster about birtherism but very little action.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2019, 08:53 PM   #160
Cabbage
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's astonishing that something as insignificant as birtherism even registers on the outrage scale.
What's astonishing is that you think such a gross misrepresentation of my position would pass by unnoticed by me. Of course, on the other hand, never once have I expected you to honestly engage with me in good faith, so "business as usual", I guess.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:29 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.