1 1
Phil1111

The 2020 Election trump v. Biden

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, billvon said:

If that were true, you'd see conservative accepting the science of evolution, plate tectonics, abiogenesis, climate change and stem cell research at about the same percentages as liberals.  That, of course, is not the case.

Fun fact - a while back they did a study where they tried to assess how much of a danger Zika was perceived to be.  When they tested conservatives they found, on average, a moderate sense of risk.  If they were first presented with an article linking Zika to illegal immigration, the percentage of conservatives who thought it was a serious risk more than doubled.  If they were first presented with an article linking Zika to climate change, the percentage declined by almost 50%.

The NYT has a good story delving into psychology, genetics and any other factors that may play into political polarization. IMO the psychology of a person is the first place to start in dealing with someone. Putin can certainly tell you that. Its labeled as an opinion piece but makes use of extensive social studies that it references.

How Could Human Nature Have Become This Politicized?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, billvon said:

If that were true, you'd see conservative accepting the science of evolution, plate tectonics, abiogenesis, climate change and stem cell research at about the same percentages as liberals.

My objection was to dekker's opinion that the right leaning population was anti-science, not that liberals are more receptive to several subsets of science.  And there are plenty of liberal anti-vaxers and those into homeopathy - doesn't mean liberals are anti-science.

And aside from climate change and stem cell research, how would a typical person's receptiveness to the other three areas really matter to society as a whole?  And of the conservative/liberals that are receptive, how many are just blindly following without ever studying or truly understanding it?  How many couldn't understand it even if they tried?

One of the issues imo is that science is ever changing and modifying itself the more we learn, so of course there is going to be opposition to long term policy especially if it's in stark opposition to one's social/political/economic ideology.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Coreece said:

My objection was to dekker's opinion that the right leaning population was anti-science, not that liberals are more receptive to several subsets of science.  And there are plenty of liberal anti-vaxers and those into homeopathy - doesn't mean liberals are anti-science.

And aside from climate change and stem cell research, how would a typical person's receptiveness to the other three areas really matter to society as a whole?  And of the conservative/liberals that are receptive, how many are just blindly following without ever studying or truly understanding it?  How many couldn't understand it even if they tried?

One of the issues imo is that science is ever changing and modifying itself the more we learn, so of course there is going to be opposition to long term policy especially if it's in stark opposition to one's social/political/economic ideology.

I agree and the story in the NYT brings some address to these ideas. IMO this is a US political development. What missing from the equation are so called "compassionate conservatives" or middle ground conservatives. Ones who believe in global warming but may object to huge projects to address it without the equal sacrifice of other countries.

There are conservatives who believe in science, who are political moderates. But trump, FOX, etc. have silenced their voices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

I agree and the story in the NYT brings some address to these ideas.

It's behind a paywall and I can't disable java right now.  Won't work in private mode either.

I'm having some cameras delivered today and my drone should be back from the repair shop so I'll probably be a bit preoccupied with work for who knows how long.  Maybe I'll read it while recording some timelapse.

And in case you're wondering, I crashed the drone into a pentagon memorial of all things.  After it fell to the ground  you could see me looking like an idiot on camera wearing my "land of the free" American flag shirt.  Very embarrassing  - pain in the ass.  I take this stuff very seriously and was very hard on myself.  I'm re-evaluating my methods and it will be awhile before I attempt risky maneuvers and shots form various angles.  When we do what we do, it's likely we're going to crash a few, but the shot I was attempting wasn't even worth it.

Anyway, UPS just dropped it off - I'm excited!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Coreece said:

My objection was to dekker's opinion that the right leaning population was anti-science, not that liberals are more receptive to several subsets of science.  And there are plenty of liberal anti-vaxers and those into homeopathy - doesn't mean liberals are anti-science.

And aside from climate change and stem cell research, how would a typical person's receptiveness to the other three areas really matter to society as a whole?  And of the conservative/liberals that are receptive, how many are just blindly following without ever studying or truly understanding it?  How many couldn't understand it even if they tried?

One of the issues imo is that science is ever changing and modifying itself the more we learn, so of course there is going to be opposition to long term policy especially if it's in stark opposition to one's social/political/economic ideology.

Of course.  And there are liberals who don't believe in evolution.  But the trend is pretty clear.   (And since Trump came into power, more conservatives than liberals think that vaccines cause autism.)

Quote

And aside from climate change and stem cell research, how would a typical person's receptiveness to the other three areas really matter to society as a whole? 

Well, evolution is pretty applicable in a society where antibiotic resistance is evolving in almost every bacterial pathogen out there - don't you think?  And of course resistance to vaccine usage is going to have a VERY big and immediate impact to the US economy over the next few years.

 

Quote

 One of the issues imo is that science is ever changing and modifying itself the more we learn, so of course there is going to be opposition to long term policy especially if it's in stark opposition to one's social/political/economic ideology.

Those two statements don't follow.  Of course science is changing the more we learn.  And of course that's no reason to oppose using science in long term policy.  This angle is used whenever science says something that goes against someone's ideology - "I'll quit smoking when a doctor can tell me my exact risk, instead of just guessing!" - but it has no validity.  Science represents the best efforts of humanity to understand the natural world, and we'd be fools to rely on people's feelings and political agendas over science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, billvon said:

Science represents the best efforts of humanity to understand the natural world, and we'd be fools to rely on people's feelings and political agendas over science.

Science is only a method to find knowledge and understanding. What we do with our knowledge is where feelings and politics are used to decide on our behaviors. I know of no one who rejects science altogether. I know of many who choose to disbelieve, or just ignore the evidence that science provides when it does not suit their agenda or fit in with what they would rather believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Science is only a method to find knowledge and understanding. What we do with our knowledge is where feelings and politics are used to decide on our behaviors.

Agreed.  Basing our decisions on science is, in general, a better way to make decisions IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, billvon said:
Quote

And aside from climate change and stem cell research, how would a typical person's receptiveness to the other three areas really matter to society as a whole? 

Well, evolution is pretty applicable in a society where antibiotic resistance is evolving in almost every bacterial pathogen out there - don't you think?

But the responsibility there mainly lies with physicians and how often or not they prescribe those antibiotics.  And if they do, they have a responsibility to inform their patients to strictly follow the dosing guidelines and to make sure they finish it regardless if their condition improved prior to that.  A typical person doesn't really have to understand the details, they just need a good doctor that they trust.

 

5 minutes ago, billvon said:

Basing our decisions on science is, in general, a better way to make decisions IMO.

It has it's place, sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MSM agenda bias...

In 1996, when Bill Clinton visited during his re-election campaign, ABC news called it a place where American ingenuity and American creativity came together and formed an amazing American accomplishment..


In 2008, when Barrack Obama campaigned there, CNN called Mt Rushmore a majestic site and every president should visit..


In 2016, Bernie Sanders campaigned there and said he was humbled to be in to be in the presence of 4 of the greatest American presidents.. CNN described the scene as awe-inspiring...


2020...Trump visits...CNN called it a celebration of white supremacy and Trump will stand before two former slave owners on land wrestled away from Native Americans...


If you think the media isn't agenda-driven, you have your head in the sand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RonD1120 said:

MSM agenda bias...

In 1996, when Bill Clinton visited during his re-election campaign, ABC news called it a place where American ingenuity and American creativity came together and formed an amazing American accomplishment..


In 2008, when Barrack Obama campaigned there, CNN called Mt Rushmore a majestic site and every president should visit..

 

In 2004, Captain Tammy Duckworth was flying her Black Hawk above Iraq, transporting troops back to base.  An Iraqi RPG hit the helicopter and exploded, tearing off both her legs and most of one arm.  She fought to control the helicopter until she passed out.  Her copilot managed to land safely despite the damage to the helicopter, and they evacuated the crew and passengers into another helicopter.

In 2012, Tammy Duckworth ran for a House seat.  She was respected by both sides of the aisle for her sacrifices for her country.  Even the Republican candidate running against her said "Of course Tammy Duckworth is a hero" despite the usual attacks.

In 2020, there's a chance she will be a vice presidential pick. And so right wing news figure Tucker Carlson said she despises America and that she is a coward, a fraud and a callous hack.  The Trump campaign - the campaign for a presidential candidate who dodged the draft - said they would "hold her accountable for cowering."

And you support these people, and blame the left wing media for being agenda-driven.  And then claim that other people have their heads in the sand.  Amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RonD1120 said:

MSM agenda bias...

In 1996, when Bill Clinton visited during his re-election campaign, ABC news called it a place where American ingenuity and American creativity came together and formed an amazing American accomplishment..


In 2008, when Barrack Obama campaigned there, CNN called Mt Rushmore a majestic site and every president should visit..


In 2016, Bernie Sanders campaigned there and said he was humbled to be in to be in the presence of 4 of the greatest American presidents.. CNN described the scene as awe-inspiring...


2020...Trump visits...CNN called it a celebration of white supremacy and Trump will stand before two former slave owners on land wrestled away from Native Americans...


If you think the media isn't agenda-driven, you have your head in the sand...

You have links for any of those comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

You have links for any of those comments?

Well maintaining the narrative is worth all costs. RT is involved in the formation of the narrative. RT has an interesting tag line "Question More" and "Q"'s followers motto is "Question Everything". Seems if Mr Putin is wagging the tail and patriotic Americans are following every wag. Nodding their heads in unison with the instructions from the Kremlin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Well maintaining the narrative is worth all costs. RT is involved in the formation of the narrative. RT has an interesting tag line "Question More" and "Q"'s followers motto is "Question Everything". Seems if Mr Putin is wagging the tail and patriotic Americans are following every wag. Nodding their heads in unison with the instructions from the Kremlin.

So assuming the links RT supplied are correct, it seems like CNN is learning and reflecting the current times. Isn't growing and learning a good thing?

I agree that the carving of the monument is quite a feat and it does look incredible. However I also believe there are a lot of issues with the story behind the monument and two of the presidents depicted were slave owners. Trump (or at the least the people around him) knew this would inflame one side and force a reaction out of his base.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SkyDekker said:

So assuming the links RT supplied are correct, it seems like CNN is learning and reflecting the current times. Isn't growing and learning a good thing?

I agree that the carving of the monument is quite a feat and it does look incredible. However I also believe there are a lot of issues with the story behind the monument and two of the presidents depicted were slave owners. Trump (or at the least the people around him) knew this would inflame one side and force a reaction out of his base.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

Deciphering Ron, RT, Q and all the rest isn't worth my time. I'm sure the FBI and CIA have some people on the job. There is a clear link IMO between Ron's post and the RT one. The story has further to run and either RT or Q can go ahead W/O me into the conspiracy zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Phil1111 said:

Deciphering Ron, RT, Q and all the rest isn't worth my time. I'm sure the FBI and CIA have some people on the job. There is a clear link IMO between Ron's post and the RT one. The story has further to run and either RT or Q can go ahead W/O me into the conspiracy zone.

Oh there is little doubt Ron has become a puppet for the Russians. Quite ironic really.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kallend said:

Not so quick. Has to go back to lower court.

Theoretical loss, practical victory for Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for prosecutors in New York to see President Trump’s financial records, a stunning defeat for Mr. Trump but a decision that probably means the records will be shielded from public scrutiny under grand jury secrecy rules until after the election, and perhaps indefinitely.

In a separate decision, the court ruled that Congress could not, at least for now, see many of the same records. The vote in both cases was 7 to 2. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote both majority opinions.

The court’s decision in favor of the New York prosecutors was a major statement on the scope and limits of presidential power, one that will take its place with landmark rulings that required President Richard M. Nixon to turn over tapes of Oval Office conversations and forced President Bill Clinton to provide evidence in a sexual harassment suit.

Net loss for Benedict Donald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Not so quick. Has to go back to lower court.

Theoretical loss, practical victory for Trump.

The ruling is now *binding* on the lower courts and that means that they *will* enforce the subpoenas. Wait and see what happens next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, normiss said:

The ruling is now *binding* on the lower courts and that means that they *will* enforce the subpoenas. Wait and see what happens next.

Sure, but nothing will happen before the election, which makes it a practical victory for Trump for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Sure, but nothing will happen before the election, which makes it a practical victory for Trump for now.

I don't think it will make a huge difference. 
The allegations are already out there.
This would just be 'real' proof. 

His supporters won't believe it any more than they believe the 'Fake News'.
They'd call it a 'Deep State' ploy, and say the records are faked.

Yes, I think they are that stupid and gullible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2020 at 5:44 PM, Phil1111 said:

Well maintaining the narrative is worth all costs. RT is involved in the formation of the narrative. RT has an interesting tag line "Question More" and "Q"'s followers motto is "Question Everything". Seems if Mr Putin is wagging the tail and patriotic Americans are following every wag. Nodding their heads in unison with the instructions from the Kremlin.

Yes!! Because George Carlin must be Q now, in retrospect.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2020 at 3:37 PM, Coreece said:
On 7/8/2020 at 2:02 PM, Phil1111 said:

I agree and the story in the NYT brings some address to these ideas.

It's behind a paywall and I can't disable java right now.  Won't work in private mode either.

I'm having some cameras delivered today and my drone should be back from the repair shop so I'll probably be a bit preoccupied with work for who knows how long.  Maybe I'll read it while recording some timelapse.

Meh, the timelapse didn't make his opinion any shorter. . .

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1