American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

I think it’s very telling that no one refuted or had any explanation for the issues that I brought up about Kamala and her debate, and instead are focusing on the “but Trump!” straw man.

Cool, she lied and deflected. Now go find us a politician who is virginally pure in both those respects. Like it or the game is the game. I'm guessing even politicians you love or loved spewed out lies. Unless you're going to claim you hate them all.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

#### that, deep fried Fido is on the menu.

solves the pitbull issue, one of those chunky b****** will feed a family of four

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

I think it’s very telling that no one refuted or had any explanation for the issues that I brought up about Kamala and her debate, and instead are focusing on the “but Trump!” straw man.

There are a few issues. For one, you're conflating selective framing and making points somewhat out of context (which is something all politicians do) with outright lying. To use a couple of examples from Trump supporters; the first one is misleading/selective while the second is an utter lie:

1) Gas prices are double what they were under Trump.

2) After-birth abortions are legal in many states.

#1 is technically true if you go off the pandemic lows, while #2 is obviously a lie.

As for the specifics you brought up:

1) Border issue; you didn't bring up anything that would be construed as a lie, just disengenous.

2) Largest increase in domestic energy production in history. You admit it's true, but misleading.

3) "Blood bath". Again, selective and misleading framing which is something basically all politicians do.

4) Trade deficit. Unless there's another instance I'm not aware of, what I saw had her saying "one of the largest" trade deficits in American history. Which is true, but as you say it isn't the whole story.

5) Unemployment rate. 2020 did see the highest spike in unemployment since the Great Depression. However, because she said "left us", that would imply that she was talking about the end of his term, so you could probably categorize that as a lie.

6) 800K increase in manufacturing jobs. I think it was more like 750K, so I'd have trouble calling that a lie. And yeah, she's ignoring the context of the pandemic, but again that's something politicians will all do to make themselves look better.

7) Tariffs and economy. Again, that's not a lie. You can say she's being disingenuous and not considering the context of the situation, but she's not making stuff up.

So almost that whole list is just leaving out context to strengthen her point. And nothing on that list comes close to approaching things like this:

After-birth abortions being legal and happening
Immigrants eating pets
Highest inflation rate in US history
2020 election was stolen

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

solves the pitbull issue, one of those chunky b****** will feed a family of four

The Pitbulls are eating the people most likely.

Donald should get one.

[timun]

Someone else pointed this out to me today: given all the rambling Trump did about crazy illegal immigrants from insane asylums... does The Donald not understand the difference between insane asylums and seeking asylum?

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by opendoor

There are a few issues. For one, you're conflating selective framing and making points somewhat out of context (which is something all politicians do) with outright lying. To use a couple of examples from Trump supporters; the first one is misleading/selective while the second is an utter lie:

1) Gas prices are double what they were under Trump.

2) After-birth abortions are legal in many states.

#1 is technically true if you go off the pandemic lows, while #2 is obviously a lie.

As for the specifics you brought up:

1) Border issue; you didn't bring up anything that would be construed as a lie, just disengenous.

2) Largest increase in domestic energy production in history. You admit it's true, but misleading.

3) "Blood bath". Again, selective and misleading framing which is something basically all politicians do.

4) Trade deficit. Unless there's another instance I'm not aware of, what I saw had her saying "one of the largest" trade deficits in American history. Which is true, but as you say it isn't the whole story.

5) Unemployment rate. 2020 did see the highest spike in unemployment since the Great Depression. However, because she said "left us", that would imply that she was talking about the end of his term, so you could probably categorize that as a lie.

6) 800K increase in manufacturing jobs. I think it was more like 750K, so I'd have trouble calling that a lie. And yeah, she's ignoring the context of the pandemic, but again that's something politicians will all do to make themselves look better.

7) Tariffs and economy. Again, that's not a lie. You can say she's being disingenuous and not considering the context of the situation, but she's not making stuff up.

So almost that whole list is just leaving out context to strengthen her point. And nothing on that list comes close to approaching things like this:

After-birth abortions being legal and happening
Immigrants eating pets
Highest inflation rate in US history
2020 election was stolen

For the umpteenth time, I’m not sure why people keep bringing up Trump examples, as if that changes anything. Nowhere in any of my posts have I justified one word out of Trump’s mouth. Nor will you see that happen. Nothing I’m saying has anything to do with Trump.

Saying that Harris is just doing what every politician does is certainly a valid point. You might be ok writing it off as normal behaviour. I’m not. Personally, I think we should hold elected officials to higher standards, particularly the leader of the most powerful country in the world. I don’t think guys like Obama did it anywhere close to the degree we see now, and his presidency wasn’t too far in the past.

[Senator Clay Davis]

So name us a politician you think is worth admiring, or trustworthy. Otherwise, this just feels like empty complaining about something that is part of the game. If you don't like or can't tolerate lying, politics ain't for you. Like if you can't accept bad officiating, sports aren't for you.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

For the umpteenth time, I’m not sure why people keep bringing up Trump examples, as if that changes anything. Nowhere in any of my posts have I justified one word out of Trump’s mouth. Nor will you see that happen. Nothing I’m saying has anything to do with Trump.

Saying that Harris is just doing what every politician does is certainly a valid point. You might be ok writing it off as normal behaviour. I’m not. Personally, I think we should hold elected officials to higher standards, particularly the leader of the most powerful country in the world. I don’t think guys like Obama did it anywhere close to the degree we see now, and his presidency wasn’t too far in the past.

You'll never be able to elect anyone then.

The best people do not become politicians, or if they do, they typically do not stick. It is not a moral or honest persons career. Not if you want to stick or have any kind of lasting success.

But the fantasy world that you want to live in is definitely a nice dream.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

So name us a politician you think is worth admiring, or trustworthy. Otherwise, this just feels like empty complaining about something that is part of the game. If you don't like or can't tolerate lying, politics ain't for you. Like if you can't accept bad officiating, sports aren't for you.

Are you telling me you don't complain about bad officiating?

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

So name us a politician you think is worth admiring, or trustworthy. Otherwise, this just feels like empty complaining about something that is part of the game. If you don't like or can't tolerate lying, politics ain't for you. Like if you can't accept bad officiating, sports aren't for you.

I literally did that in my post.

And what a terrible example for you. Yes, officiating is bad and I think it should be better, and would love to see officials get held more accountable. You’re saying “if you care about hockey, you won’t criticize officials, even if they’re bad”

[Locke]

Originally Posted by timun

Someone else pointed this out to me today: given all the rambling Trump did about crazy illegal immigrants from insane asylums... does The Donald not understand the difference between insane asylums and seeking asylum?

Again...the fact remains...'it doesnt matter.'

When has Trump ever told the truth? The people who support him don't CARE.

Trumpism has well and truly crossed the threshold of being a Cult and its been that way for a while.

What he says doesnt matter, they'll still drink the Kool-Aid.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Are you telling me you don't complain about bad officiating?

Originally Posted by ThePrince

I literally did that in my post.

And what a terrible example for you. Yes, officiating is bad and I think it should be better, and would love to see officials get held more accountable. You’re saying “if you care about hockey, you won’t criticize officials, even if they’re bad”

No, you can criticize it all you'd like. But it ain't gonna change, no matter how much you may want it to. Officiating sucked when I was 10, 20, 30. Politicians been lying since I was 10, 20, 30. C'est la vie and all that ####. But getting up in arms about Harris lying when the other guy is likely top 10 liars in human history....hmmmm....

Edit: And yeah Obama lied, deceived, misled, or did not follow through on promises. But he was likeable, so it's more forgivable, I guess?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by timun

Someone else pointed this out to me today: given all the rambling Trump did about crazy illegal immigrants from insane asylums... does The Donald not understand the difference between insane asylums and seeking asylum?

He clearly does not.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

For the umpteenth time, I’m not sure why people keep bringing up Trump examples, as if that changes anything. Nowhere in any of my posts have I justified one word out of Trump’s mouth. Nor will you see that happen. Nothing I’m saying has anything to do with Trump.

Saying that Harris is just doing what every politician does is certainly a valid point. You might be ok writing it off as normal behaviour. I’m not. Personally, I think we should hold elected officials to higher standards, particularly the leader of the most powerful country in the world. I don’t think guys like Obama did it anywhere close to the degree we see now, and his presidency wasn’t too far in the past.

I don't know, didn't Obama often talk about how many jobs were created under his Presidency? A lot of that relies on ignoring the fact that he came into office during an economic crisis and some kind of recovery was inevitable. Similar to how Harris frames the Biden administration as it relates to the recovery from COVID.

And you can't say it has nothing to do with Trump. Your post was expressing disbelief that no one was criticizing Harris. But is it really surprising that people don't make a bit deal about normal political speak from one candidate when the other candidate is saying probably the most ridiculous stuff ever said in a Presidential debate? Obviously the latter is going to get virtually all the attention and criticism.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

If someone thinks that Obama was pristine and didn't selectively use information to sell his plan, or exaggerate the truth and leave out context, they weren't paying attention. He was just extremely stealthy about it, one of the best I've ever seen.

At this point I'm not sure what ThePrince's concerns are about Harris. She's untrustworthy? Her entire career would indicate otherwise, regardless of any examples from the debate last night (which are minor at best). She changes her mind on issues? Good, I want a politician to be flexible enough to change when new information comes to them.

[Senator Clay Davis]

His point seems to be that we need to have balance and criticize Harris for her lying and deception, and ignore Trump's cause that's who he is and we should except nothing from him but lying and deception.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I don't know, didn't Obama often talk about how many jobs were created under his Presidency? A lot of that relies on ignoring the fact that he came into office during an economic crisis and some kind of recovery was inevitable. Similar to how Harris frames the Biden administration as it relates to the recovery from COVID.

And you can't say it has nothing to do with Trump. Your post was expressing disbelief that no one was criticizing Harris. But is it really surprising that people don't make a bit deal about normal political speak from one candidate when the other candidate is saying probably the most ridiculous stuff ever said in a Presidential debate? Obviously the latter is going to get virtually all the attention and criticism.

I think that living in Canada, you don’t see some of the damage that those policies have done, so it’s easy to just write them off as “normal political speak”. In reality, when you look at something like the border and immigration crisis, that’s something that has had a notable impact on many people’s every day lives, so yes, the “normal political speak” is a big deal when it’s tangibly worsened people’s lives.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

His point seems to be that we need to have balance and criticize Harris for her lying and deception, and ignore Trump's cause that's who he is and we should except nothing from him but lying and deception.

Well then...that's a pretty terrible point to make. It's not based on moral conviction or maintaining a standard. It's selectively targeting one candidate only, for motivations that are unclear to us.

Edit: ah, I see now. He's mad about the border and blaming her. Got it.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Well then...that's a pretty terrible point to make. It's not based on moral conviction or maintaining a standard. It's selectively targeting one candidate only, for motivations that are unclear to us.

Edit: ah, I see now. He's mad about the border and blaming her. Got it.

Ya what a terrible point to make that we should politicians accountable. You’re so right, how could I be so stupid as to hold politicians accountable for the decisions they’ve made in the time period immediately before this.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Well thank you so much for holding Harris to account. I feel like we can move on now.