The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[BigRedBuster]

21 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Whatever the Left wants is "scientific"  The hacks at Scientific American have decided to put real science aside and embrace politicized psuedo-science.  The only saving grave is that they are likely not professional scientists but merely 'science writers' which generally means they got a humanities degree and attended a training seminar on how to simplify science. 

 

 But normal people don't make that distinction.  To them S.A. is now just another N.Y.T. et al.

Great.  So why won't republicans believe actual scientists that have multiple degrees and have committed their lives to a particular science?

[Moiraine]

13 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

Thanks funhusker.

Using your personal example of your own brother, does his transition in viewpoint make him no longer your brother? Was he smart 5 years ago and is now an imbecile not capable of coherent thoughts? 

 

Because that is the vibe I was getting from Moiraine.

 

 

We can learn things about people we were ignorant about before and reassess our relationships with them. But I think this conversation is a bit weird given my post. I am not saying any action at all should be taken. I'm saying this is what these people are doing. They will take Trump's side no matter how respectable the person speaking out against him is. I didn't say how we should react to it.

 

If you think people feel the same way about Biden you're way off base. Just look at the poll someone posted on the election. A lot are voting for him but not happy he's the choice they have. There aren't really examples to choose from of highly respected Democrats or scientists or other experts saying he's done something reprehensible, and many of us on this forum have spoken numerous times against views he has. You can change the words in my post but that doesn't make you correct.

[DevoHusker]

2 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

We can learn things about people we were ignorant about before and reassess our relationships with them. But I think this conversation is a bit weird given my post. I am not saying any action at all should be taken. I'm saying this is what these people are doing. They will take Trump's side no matter how respectable the person speaking out against him is.

 

If you think people feel the same way about Biden you're way off base. Just look at the poll someone posted on the election. A lot are voting for him but not happy he's the choice they have. There aren't really examples to choose from of highly respected Democrats or scientists or other experts saying he's done something reprehensible, and many of us on this forum have spoken numerous times against views he has. You can change the words in my post but that doesn't make you correct.

 

Thanks Moiraine, I see some nuances from this explanation I did not in your first post originally. 

 

However, I stand by my take that while you say Trump supporters do this to people who say anything bad about Trump, there are Never Trumpers that take the same stance with moderates or anyone left of center that says anything complimentary about Trump or his policies. 

[funhusker]

3 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

Thanks Moiraine, I see some nuances from this explanation I did not in your first post originally. 

 

However, I stand by my take that while you say Trump supporters do this to people who say anything bad about Trump, there are Never Trumpers that take the same stance with moderates or anyone left of center that says anything complimentary about Trump or his policies. 

I agree 100%.  But there is a big difference between supporting something Trump has done like reducing soldiers in foreign conflicts, and saying "science can't be trusted" because a publisher backs a candidate for the first time in its history.  

 

The crazy statements are what we are talking about.

[Dr. Strangelove]

1 hour ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Whatever the Left wants is "scientific"  The hacks at Scientific American have decided to put real science aside and embrace politicized psuedo-science.  The only saving grave is that they are likely not professional scientists but merely 'science writers' which generally means they got a humanities degree and attended a training seminar on how to simplify science. 

 

 But normal people don't make that distinction.  To them S.A. is now just another N.Y.T. et al.

Can you please describe the psuedo-science? Is it Climate Change or about COVID?

 

Provide respected peer reviewed studies to back up your claims. 

[RedDenver]

1 hour ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 But normal people don't make that distinction.  To them S.A. is now just another N.Y.T. et al.

I literally laughed out loud.

[Notre Dame Joe]

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Great.  So why won't republicans believe actual scientists that have multiple degrees and have committed their lives to a particular science?

 

Well some  a.s.t.h.m.ds. say Climate Change will cause massive flooding in X years.  Then why are trusting Ds building multi-million dollar mansions on the beach?  

[commando]

8 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Well some  a.s.t.h.m.ds. say Climate Change will cause massive flooding in X years.  Then why are trusting Ds building multi-million dollar mansions on the beach?  

trump believes in climate change when it affects him...no when it affects others.

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-seeks-wall-irish-golf-threatened-rising-seas-article-1.2647423

 

Trump International Golf Links & Hotel, in County Clare, Ireland, explicitly cited the threat of global warming in its attempt to secure a permit for a two-mile stone wall that would section off the sprawling resort from the Atlantic Ocean, according to the company's application, first reported on by Politico and filed earlier this month in Ireland.

[Moiraine]

3 hours ago, DevoHusker said:

Thanks Moiraine, I see some nuances from this explanation I did not in your first post originally. 

 

However, I stand by my take that while you say Trump supporters do this to people who say anything bad about Trump, there are Never Trumpers that take the same stance with moderates or anyone left of center that says anything complimentary about Trump or his policies. 

 

 

Agreed, but there is a huge discrepancy in volumes.

 

Also, it’s still a lot different from what I’m talking about. A comparison would be if the 10 people with pristine records and 30 years of experience were whistleblowers against Biden and people continued to support Biden and completely trashed the 10 people and decided all of their experience and records meant nothing at all. Not only that but the 10 people are Democrats or in highly respected positions in the military. 

 

That is far more ridiculous and a better comparison than people thinking Trump is an a$$h@!e and ignoring his miniscule accomplishments. 

[Danny Bateman]

4 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Whatever the Left wants is "scientific"  The hacks at Scientific American have decided to put real science aside and embrace politicized psuedo-science.  The only saving grave is that they are likely not professional scientists but merely 'science writers' which generally means they got a humanities degree and attended a training seminar on how to simplify science. 

 

 But normal people don't make that distinction.  To them S.A. is now just another N.Y.T. et al.

 

Project the faults of their leader onto others? Check.

 

Zero tolerance for criticism and degrade those who speak out against leader? Check.

 

Claim the mantle of "normal" Americans or "real" Americans or whatever descriptor of being superior to those speaking out? Check.

 

Like it or not, @commando has a point, as this is pretty textbook behavior common in cults. Here's a list of potential warning signs, decide for yourself how similar it is:

 

Quote

• Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

• No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

• No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget or expenses, such as an independently audited financial statement.

• Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

• There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

• Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

• There are records, books, news articles, or broadcast reports that document the abuses of the group/leader.

• Followers feel they can never be "good enough".

• The group/leader is always right.

• The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

 

And this argument about pseudoscience would be a lot more powerful if Trump didn't just contradict his own CDC director for his own political benefit.

 

 

[FrantzHardySwag]

Too dangerous to vote on campus. Safer for us to stuff you in shuttles and have you overwhelm other polling locations....

[Guy Chamberlin]

13 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I can't believe I'm going to say this, but please, don't vote. I've come to understand that it's not really something people can do.

 

Much like I lack the knowledge to walk into a hospital and perform surgery, it seems Americans lack the ability to walk into a voting booth, think critically (is science REAL? Should gay people be treated EQUALLY?!) and fill in a bubble at the same time. A surgical room is not for me; a voting booth is not for you.

 

I didn't think it was enough to +1 this. I wanted to see it again. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

22 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

omg, they can never again complain that Americans don't "trust the science."  they just made themselves into partisan hacks. 

 

Uhm......I think it's the growing number of Americans who "don't trust the science" that have inspired scientists to lobby for their incredibly valuable profession. It's the exact opposite of being a hack. 

 

At this point I think it's only fair that Trump voters boycott science and every product and medical procedure it's made possible. 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

6 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Well some  a.s.t.h.m.ds. say Climate Change will cause massive flooding in X years.  Then why are trusting Ds building multi-million dollar mansions on the beach?  

Thanks for the non-answer.  That says a lot. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

9 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

Whatever the Left wants is "scientific"  The hacks at Scientific American have decided to put real science aside and embrace politicized psuedo-science.  The only saving grave is that they are likely not professional scientists but merely 'science writers' which generally means they got a humanities degree and attended a training seminar on how to simplify science. 

 

 But normal people don't make that distinction.  To them S.A. is now just another N.Y.T. et al.

 

What do you do for a living?